Implementation of Outcomes-Based Education in an Interdisciplinary Design Course and

Curriculum: An Action Research Study

by

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Graduate Department of Leadership, Adult and Higher Education

University of Toronto

© Copyright by Bahar Mousavi Hejazi 2021

Implementation of Outcomes- Based Education in an Interdisciplinary Design Course and
Curriculum: An Action Research Study.
Bahar Mousavi Hejazi
Doctor of Philosophy
University of Toronto
2021

Abstract
This is a case study that focuses on the challenges that I, as the action researcher and design

educator at the post-secondary level face in the integration of an outcomes-based curriculum

model that has been adopted in recent years by the higher education sector in Ontario in order to

ensure quality, transparency and compatibility among the credentials. In this thesis, I studied the

implementation of the outcomes-based education curriculum in a design program through

investigative cycles of action-reflection of my own teaching practice as well as that of my

colleagues in the Art and Design Foundation Program at the School of Design, George Brown

College. The selection of action research as my strategy of inquiry is my response to the

qualitative and critical nature of the challenges that educators are facing in their efforts to

integrate learner-centered principles in their teaching practice. My research has been completed

in two phases: Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self and Phase B – Critical Dialogue with the

Institution. The participants of my study are my students in Foundation Design II: Colour Theory

and Practice, one Critical Expert from the Teaching and Learning Exchange, one Interested

Observer (graduate of the program), Art and Design Foundation faculty and a Critical

Administrator at the College. These are the synthesis of the insights I gained:

Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self:

• A holistic approach to teaching and learning of the foundation of art and design.

ii
 • Proactivity and reflexivity in my teaching practice with the goal of self-improvement

and growth based on personal beliefs and social values.

• A flexible learning-centered approach in course planning.

• Sense of care towards student learning.

• Mentality of success in teaching and learning: we are a team and we are working

together to succeed.

Phase B – Critical Dialogue with the Institution

• A holistic learning-centered approach in the art and design foundation curriculum

planning.

• Use of new strategies to engage faculty in curriculum development.

• Use of design thinking tools in curriculum design.

• Empowering students and faculty by giving voice to their individual beliefs and

values in art and design education.

iii
 Acknowledgements

I am deeply grateful to my dear thesis supervisor, Dr. Katharine Janzen, for her amazing

support, invaluable guidance and kind mentorship throughout my PhD journey. I also thank my

PhD thesis committee members, Dr. Catherine Drea and Dr. Erika Kustra for their expert

knowledge and productive suggestions on my dissertation. I am grateful to George Brown

College for their support of my research, especially the School of Design, the Office of Research

and Innovation, the Academic Services and Student Affairs, the Office of Academic Excellence,

the Teaching and learning Exchange and Corinne Abba, the Liaison Librarian at the School of

Design. A heartful thanks to the School of Design’s administration, Dean Luigi Ferrara, the

former Chair, Dr. Elise Hodson and the current Chair of the School, Dr. Ana Rita Morais, and

Gary Hanrahan, the Operations Manager, for their incredible support of my teaching and

research throughout the years.

I greatly appreciate the active and collegial participation of my dear colleagues in the

Art and Design Foundation Program, Doug Darrah, Sheeraz Wania, Helen Marioncu, Derek

Liddington, Jennifer Foote and Sabrina Russo in my research and the improvement of the

curriculum based on some of the findings of this study. My former colleague, Edda Dolcetti had

a crucial role in the development of the Foundation Colour course which was the case study of

my research and kindly shared her teaching documents with me.

I thank all of my students and most specifically Saretta Nawar Khan, my former student

who participated in my research as an Interested Observer and the student participants who were

actively engaged in my research and shared their artworks with me. And finally, I thank my

wonderful family and all the people who believed in me, challenged me, inspired me and

supported me in my research journey.

iv
 Dedication

To my beloved parents, Amir Masoud and Simin who encouraged me to follow my dreams

To my sister, Negar who gave me her wisdom along the way

To my life partner, Homayoun who supported me with his kindness and love

To my children, Namdar & Nazanin and

their partners Andreea & Abhi who accompanied me in my journey

To my granddaughter Lucia

and the next generation of creative learners and compassionate leaders

v
 Table of Contents
Page

Chapter One: Introduction …………………………………………………………… 1

Context of the Study …………………………………………………………… 2

Background ……………………………………………………………………. 2

Statement of the Problem Situation ………………………………………….. 4

Purpose of the Research ……………………………………………………… 5

Personal Interest ……………………………………………………………… 6

Research Questions …………………………………………………………… 7

Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………………… 7

Scope and Limitations of the Research ……………………………………….. 8

Summary of Chapter One ……………………………………………………. 9

Terms and Definitions ………………………………………………………… 10

Chapter Two: Literature Review ……………………………………………………… 15

Learning Outcomes and Quality of Learning: A Shift of Paradigm …………… 16

Impact of the OBE Model on the Quality of Teaching and Learning …………. 29

Implementation of Outcomes-Based Education in Postsecondary Education …. 45

Outcomes-Based Education and Leadership of Change ……………………….. 49

Practice of Action Research in Curriculum Planning ………………………….. 56

Scope and Limitations of the Literature Review ………………………………. 64

Summary of Chapter Two ………………………………………………………. 65

Chapter Three: Research Design And Methodology ……………………………………. 67

Research Questions ……………………………………………………………… 68

vi
 Page

Research Design ………………………………………………………………… 68

Research Methodology ………………………………………………………….. 70

Phase A - Critical Dialogue with Self ………………………………………….. 73

Phase B - Critical Dialogue with the Institution ………………………………. 78

Site and Participation Selection ……………………………………………….. 80

Data Collection and Recording ………………………………………………… 81

Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………….. 95

Establishing Credibility …….………………………………………………… 98

Methodological Assumptions …………………………………………………. 100

Limitations of the Methodology ………………………………………………. 102

Ethical Issues and Considerations ……………………………………………… 105

Summary of Chapter Three ……………………………………………………. 108

Chapter Four: Findings and Analysis in Phase A - Critical Dialogue with Self ………… 110

Phase A: Method/ Scope/ Context/ Participants ……………………………….. 110

Action Research Model for Phase A …………………………………………… 112

Phase A.1- Action ……………………………………………………………… 114

Phase A.2 - Research …………………………………………………………… 152

Phase A.3 – Evaluation ………………………………………………………….. 163

Phase A.4 - Move in a New Direction …………………………………………… 189

Summary of Chapter Four ……………………………………………………… 190

Chapter Five: Findings in Phase B- Critical Dialogue with the Institution ……………… 191

Phase B: Method/ Scope/ Context/ Participants ………………………………… 191

vii
 Page

Action Research Model for Phase B …………………………………………… 193

Phase B.1- Action ……………………………………………………………… 194

Phase B.2 – Research …………………………………………………………... 205

Phase B.3 – Evaluation ………………………………………………………… 207

Phase B.4 - Move to New Direction ……………………………………………. 222

Summary of Chapter five ……………………………………………………….. 227

Chapter Six: Conclusions and Implications of the Findings ………………………….…. 229

Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………… 229

Synthesis of My Insights: An Integrated Model of Action Research ……………. 231

Synthesis of My Insights: Phase A- Critical Dialogue with Self ……………….. 233

Synthesis of My Insights: Phase B - Critical Dialogue with the Institution ……. 236

Implications for Practice …………………………………………………. ……. 242

Implications for Further Research ……………………………………………… 243

Contribution of the Findings …………………………………………………….. 244

List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………………. ix

List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………… x

List of Appendices ………………………………………………………………………. xii

References ………………………………………………………………………………. 246

viii
List of Tables Page

Table 1
Designer’s Competencies: in italics, the strategic skills for design now
(Borja de Mozota, 2010) ……………………………………………………………….. 34

Table 2
Data Sources to Answer the Research Questions ……………………………………………. 94

Table 3
Comparative Table for Assessment Tools (ATs), Descriptions and Grade Breakdown in
ART1021- Winter 2015 and ART1021- Summer 2017……………………………………… 125

Table 4
Teaching and Learning Session Formats Within the Units of Learning: ART1021
Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice- Summer 2017………………………… 135

Table 5
Course Management/ The Teacher Scores- SFQ Questionnaire-ART1021-CRN 83477
-Spring/ Summer 2017 …………………………………………………………………………….. 176

Table 6
Course Content Scores- SFQ Questionnaire-ART1021-CRN 83477-Spring/ Summer
2017……………………………………………………………………………………….. 185

Table 7
Name and Teaching Status of the Faculty Participants- 2017-2019
(with their written consent) ……………………………………………………………………… 192

Table 8
Comparative Program Vocational Learning Outcomes Pre-existing (2008)
and Latest (2016) …………………………………………………………………………….. 197

Table 9
G108 Program Description Update- Academic Year 2016-2017…………………………… 198

Table 10
Proposed Curriculum Structure ………………………………………………………………… 226

Table 11
General Competencies (Knowledge, Skills, Attitude) for Educators and Their Importance in the
Implementation of an Effective OBE Curriculum …………………………………………….. 243

ix
List of Figures Page

Figure 1
Action-Research Cycle ………………………………………………………………… 74

Figure 2
Action-Reflection Cycle ………………………………………………………………… 75

Figure 3
Action-Reflection Loop ‘Pl-Ac-O-Re’ …………………………………………………… 76

Figure 4
Mousavi Hejazi Action Research Cycle …………………………………………………. 77

Figure 5
The Learning Cycle ……………………………………………………………………… 78

Figure 6
Constructive Alignment proposed by Biggs and Tang (2007) …………………………… 78

Figure 7
Concurrent Phase A and Phase B of Action-Reflection Cycle ………………………….. 80

Figure 8
Data collection Tools for Phase A-Critical Dialogue With Self ………………………… 91

Figure 9
Data Collection Tools for Phase B-Critical Dialogue with the Institution ……………….. 93

Figure 10
Organization of data into categories ……………………………………………………... 97

Figure 11
Project 1/ Phase 1- Colour Wheel by Yanjun Liu ……………………………………………… 126

Figure 12
Project 1/ Phase 2- Composition (Reflection of Self) by Joanna Martinez ………………. 127

Figure 13
Project 2:Six Colour Contrast Variations by Nisha Srivastava ………………………….. 128

Figure 14
Project 2/ Creative Process - Grids by Nisha Srivastava …………………………………. 128

Figure 15
Project 3: Illusion of Depth by Ashley Brisebois ……………………………………… 130

x
List of Figures Page

Figure 16
Studio Lab: Physical Environment- School of Design, Summer 2017 …………………. 133

Figure 17
Studio Lab: Computer Station- School of Design ………………………………………. 133

Figure 18
Sample Sketchbook- Element of Design: Colour by Zan Ding …………………………. 137

Figure 19
Display of Project 3 Student Sample Works- ART1021- Summer 2017 ……………….. 142

Figure 20
Sample Agenda on Whiteboard- Day 2- ART1021 Summer 2017 …………………….. 142

Figure 21
Concurrent Phase A and Phase B of Action-Research Model proposed by
Mousavi Hejazi ………………………………………………………………………….. 232

Figure 22
Design Thinking Process in OBE Curriculum Planning proposed by
Mousavi Hejazi …………………………………………………………………………… 239

xi
List of Appendices Page

Appendix A Administrative Consent Form …………………………………………… 267

Appendix B Informed Consent - Student Participants .………………………………. 270

Appendix Bi Critical Incident Questionnaire Form ……………………………………. 273

Appendix C Informed Consent – Interested Observer (Graduate of the Program) ……. 274

Appendix Ci Questionnaire for Interested Observer ……………………………………. 277

Appendix D Informed Consent for Critical Expert …………………………………….. 278

Appendix Di Conversation Guide – Critical Expert ……………………………………. 281

Appendix E Informed Consent – Critical Administrator ………………………………. 282

Appendix Ei Guide for Administrator Interview ………………………………………. 285

Appendix F Informed Consent Reflection Group Meeting – Faculty ……………..…… 286

Appendix Fi SWOC Analysis Questionnaire– For Faculty/ Reflection

Group Discussion………………………………………………………………………… 289

Appendix F ii Guide for Reflection Group Discussion …………………………………. 290

Appendix G G108 Course List and Prerequisites ………………………………….. 291

Appendix Gi Course Outline Sample ……………………………………………….. 293

Appendix G ii ART1021 Foundation Colour Course Outline– W2015 …………………. 297

Appendix G iii ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice

Course Outline– S2017 ………………………………………………………………….. 303

Appendix G iv Teaching Documents (Project 1, 2, 3, 4 Worksheets and Rubrics,

and Library Activity Worksheet for Project 4)…………………………………………… 309

Appendix G v Guideline Draft Rationale ……………………………………………. 320

Appendix G vi Sample Agenda – Day 2 – ART1027 Summer 2017 ………………… 321

xii
Appendix G vii ‘About Me’ Questionnaire ……………………………………………… 322

Appendix G viii Sample Critique Sheet (ART1020 Project 1. Study of

Form Point/Line/Shape) ………………………………………………………………… 323

Appendix G ix Student Feedback Questionnaire …………………………………….. 324

Appendix G x Figures for Chapter Four and Chapter Five …………………………… 332

Appendix H End of the Year Questionnaire ………………………………………... 342

xiii
 Chapter One: Introduction

This was an action research study that sought to explore and describe the opportunities

and challenges of implementing Outcomes Based Education (OBE) in the Art and Design

Foundation Program at George Brown College School of Design in Toronto (see “Administrative

Consent to name GBC” in Appendix A). Quality assurance of publicly supported education

programs has long been a concern of governments, academics, administrators and others.

Outcomes-based learning is not a new educational practice but has been adopted in the

new millennium to ensure quality, transparency and compatibility among the credentials. This is

a transformative perspective, which introduces strategic educational planning aimed at achieving

results that could answer both the managerial purposes of quality assurance as well as the

enhancement of the quality of teaching and learning in higher education. Focus on the quality of

learning is the starting phase of the shift from teaching to learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995) that has

occurred in the past 30 years, first in the US and consecutively in Europe and more recently in

Canadian universities and colleges.

With the change in curriculum paradigm from a traditional teacher-driven education

system to the learning focused outcomes-based education (OBE), policy makers in Canada

(Lennon, 2010; Lennon et al. 2014; Liu, 2015; MacFarlane & Brumwell, 2016; Pichette &

Watkins, 2018) are considering the development of common tools and strategies that would

enhance the learning-focused approach in a global context.

1
 2

Context of the Study

In this study, I explored the different aspects of the implementation of the OBE

framework in art and design education through the literature review of best practices in my field

of study. I investigated the challenges that I faced in terms of course design, delivery, evaluation

and continuous development in the Art and Design Program through a reflective action research

study of my own teaching practice as well as my collaboration with my colleagues and

administration at the School of Design and other divisions at George Brown College.

Background

Designers and design educators face tremendous changes and challenges in the 21st century. On

one hand, the new designer is embracing complexity by moving from maker of things to that of strategic

thinker who aims to bring meaningful and human design solutions to social, cultural and environmental

problems within a fast-paced economy. On the other hand, they should be able to prove the value and

effectiveness of design in an ever-increasing high-tech and competitive business environment (Justice,

2019; Mousavi Hejazi & Borja de Mozota, 2015). The question is: How are design educators adapting

their teaching practice to prepare students for the challenges that new designers are facing?

The globalization of labour markets and competition in a knowledge based economy (KBE) have

placed increased demand on Canadian higher education systems to develop a wide variety of programs

that would provide students with the required competencies to respond to the changing needs of the

workplace (Lennon, 2010). Furthermore, there is an increasing demand for demonstrated accountability,

given the substantial private and more importantly public, investments in higher education within a

context of fierce competition for resources from health, police and fire services, for instance.

Largely in response to this public demand, in 2010, the Council of Ontario Universities (COU)

established the Council on Quality Assurance to guide the quality of both undergraduate and graduate
 3

university programs and degrees offered in the province. In Ontario, the Quality Assurance Framework

established in 2012 requires that all institutions implement an Institutional Quality Assurance Program

(IQAP) review that is consistent with their institutional mission statements and degree level

expectations. “It is the identification, measurement, and designation of qualifications that ensures

transparency of the credential to the benefit of the students/graduates and their institutions, as well as to

future national and international employers,” says Lennon (2010, p. 3).

The demand for accountability begs the question: Accountable for what? Articulation of intended

learning outcomes or Undergraduate Degree Level Outcomes (UDLEs), or the Graduate Degree Level

Outcomes (GDLEs) at the course or program level provides one measure, a benchmark, for one

important aspect of the mandate of higher education, that is, what the students are expected to be able to

demonstrate in terms of knowledge, skills and attitudes gained upon completion of the course or

program. Faculty are free to articulate, within the broader framework of the (Undergraduate Degree

Level Expectations (UDLE) and Graduate Degree Level Expectations (GDLE) benchmarks, what they

expect the students to have learned at the end of their course/program, and they are free to be as creative

as they wish in the teaching-learning process that enables students to reach these expectations.

The European Union (EU) has fully embraced OBE and states that the implementation of

OBE will “improve the transparency, access, progression and quality of qualifications in relation

to the labour market and civil society” (European Union, 2008, p 11). On the other hand,

transition from traditional input/content teaching approaches to output/outcomes practices

requires a clear understanding of both approaches and the challenges that institutions face in

implementing the outcomes-based model.

In my action research study, I explored best practices identified in the literature that I

reviewed as well as the lessons learned from my actual experiences in order to facilitate the
 4

transformational process. In this context, Malan (2000) points out that “learners have to assume

greater responsibility and actively participate in the learning process. Educational practitioners

have to become more attuned to planning and managing learning environments and must be

committed to the ideal of valid and reliable assessment” (p. 28).

Statement of the Problem Situation

OBE is not a new educational practice and has been adopted in the past decades by some

higher education systems around the world such as Europe, Australia, the United States and

Canada among others to ensure quality, transparency and compatibility among the credentials.

Furthermore, outcomes-based learning is recognized as the most suitable pedagogic model for

the market-driven post-secondary systems of today’s knowledge-based economy (Harrison,

2017; Lennon, 2010; Pichette et al. 2018). This innovative learning model provides institutions

and governments with the best tools for quality measurement and credit transfer nationally as

well as internationally.

Adamson et al. (2010) explain, “At the beginning of the 90s, an EU pilot project showed

that study programs were much easier to compare if they were described in terms of outcomes,

instead of inputs” (p. 4). That study led to the development of a ‘European Higher Education

Model’ through what has become known as the Bologna Process, with OBE as its core

component. The growing importance of learning outcomes defined by the European Commission

as “written statements of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to do at

the end of a period of learning (Adamson, 2010, p.4),” created the context for the development of

learning outcome frameworks not only in the European countries but around the world.

“Learning outcomes is something that the Bologna process has been working on for a

decade. Some countries such as Britain moved to a leaning-outcomes approach some years ago
 5

while others are still addressing the issue,” contends Harvey (2008, p. 19). In this context, the

Canadian higher education is facing new challenges by showing a shift from humanist to

economic-utilitarian objectives, which suggests learning outcomes as the preferred way forward

in Canada. Harvey states,

This is evidenced in reviews of the higher education system in the provinces of Ontario,

British Columbia, Alberta, and Newfoundland and Labrador that are linked to economic

growth, competitive international environments, and the need for a highly skilled

workforce. The renaissance is not just because massification and economic utilitarianism

have inevitable consequences but because there appears to be a pause and a re-think

about what constitutes a quality education. (p. 1)

The latest achievement in terms of defining and assessing learning outcomes in Ontario is

the publication of the Learning Outcomes Assessment: A Practitioner’s Handbook (Goff, L. et

al., 2015) prepared by scholars from several Ontario post-secondary institutions and published by

The Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO). This booklet discusses a

framework of assessment of learning outcomes and provides the interested parties in colleges

and universities with practical tools that enhance the assessment of program-level learning

outcomes.

Purpose of the Research

Recent policies of Ontario’s postsecondary organizations show a growing trend toward

the development of strategies that enhance interactive teaching-learning environments. However,

the formulation and implementation of a learning-centered approach require the establishment of

a new culture and its improvement within the academic environments that may still

predominantly operate in the traditional teacher-centered style.

 6

As a professional design educator and a reflective practitioner, I explored the overall

challenges facing the formulation of learning outcomes and implementation of an effectively

aligned and integrated OBE-Based design curriculum with a synthesis of the best practices at the

George Brown College School of Design in Toronto.

Personal Interest

This research is a case study of my own teaching practice through the implementation of

the principles of outcomes-based education in an interdisciplinary design course that I teach at

the School of Design, George Brown College. I have studied my teaching practice in the

Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice course that I am teaching in the Art and

Design Foundation Program at the School of Design. Delivered in the format of studio, this

course is offered in the second semester of the Art and Design Foundation Program at George

Brown College School of Design.

My interest in this research was based on seven years of teaching design courses at both

the college and university levels in Ontario (at the time that I proposed this study in 2015) which

operates using outcomes-based/ learning-centered models of education. I believe that the

outcomes-based approach provides a flexible model where the success of students becomes the

main focus of the teaching-learning experience and proposes strategic educational planning with

the aim of achieving results. I also believe that to be effective, the transition from a teaching-

centered to a learning-centered approach should be meticulously planned, implemented and

evaluated.

I believe that my experience as I implemented outcomes-based education in the course

that I teach and the findings of this action research study will support me in my current teaching

practice and will help me to contribute effectively to the facilitation of the transitional process at
 7

both the program and the institutional levels at the site of the study. The dissemination of the

findings of this study will also identify best practices at George Brown College.

Research Questions

The overall research question of this action research study was, How can I, as a design educator,

adapt my teaching praxis within an outcomes-based curriculum to prepare students for the challenges

that new designers are facing and how can I develop a model of effective OBE in design programs that

may facilitate the transition from teacher-centered to learner-centered education?

The specific research questions that drove this study were:

Research Question #1. How do I develop and implement an outcomes-based course and

curriculum?

Research Question #2. How do I effectively evaluate my teaching praxis?

Research Question #3. How do I contribute to the implementation of outcomes-based education

in the institution?

Theoretical Framework

My research methodology was a qualitative approach using action research as my

strategy of inquiry. Teacher-researchers often produce evidence of their own learning in many

different forms such as reflective journals, blogs, portfolios, memos and emails, or artworks and

visual metaphors. In order to determine if other people have been influenced by the action

researcher’s action, the researcher can ask these questions, Have I influenced you? How? In this

context, the researcher can use other traditional research methods such as interview or survey

and questionnaires to gather the accounts of participants with respect to what and how they have

learned as the consequence of their actions (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011, pp. 66-67).
 8

Reflective practitioners become critically involved with their own practice in order to

improve their work. By taking action, they give meaning to their lives as they try to live their

values in their practice. By generating a living form of theory (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011), they

study their own practice and produce personal theories from within that practice.

My interest in action research as my research methodology is influenced by Habermas’

(1987) theory of communicative action that promotes dialogue which is “central to human life

and combines both reflection and action leading to praxis” (Joyce & Tutela, 2006, p. 65) as well

as the concept of reflective practitioner introduced by Schön (1983, 1984) which in turn is based

on Dewey’s (1910, 1933) “studies of human experience as producer of knowledge” (Herr &

Anderson, 2005).

Scope and Limitations of the Research

This study was limited in scope as it was based on my own teaching praxis within one

course in one design program at one Ontario College during the Spring/ Summer semester 2017.

While some program-specific findings will not be generalizable from this case study, the

research insights and the action-research model emerged from the study will provide other

similar settings with greater understanding of the implications of OBE from the point of view of

the teacher-practitioner and perhaps practical guidelines of the development of learning

outcomes within creative-based programs. According to Yin (2018)

Case studies, like experiments, are generalizable to theoretical propositions and not to

populations or universes… In this sense, neither the “case” nor the case study, like the

experiment, represent “samples”. Rather, in doing case study research, your goal will be

to expand and generalize theories (analytic generalizations). (p. 20)

 9

Since overcoming the challenges of the transition from teacher-centred to learner-centred

teaching and implementing effective OBE curricula is a common practice for many post-

secondary programs, the findings will be of interest to post-secondary institutions in all types of

programs in Ontario as well as nationally and internationally.

Summary of Chapter One

The purpose of this research study was to explore the opportunities and challenges of the

implementation of the principles of outcomes-based education at George Brown College (GBC)

in Toronto through an action research study and reflective practice of my teaching in the

Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice course that I teach at the School of Design as

well as in my role as the Academic Coordinator of the Art and Design Foundation Program in

curriculum design.

The unique interdisciplinary characteristic of the Art and Design Foundation Program at

the School of Design at GBC and the changing face of design education, the questions of quality

measurement, transferability and the integration of design graduates in the marketplace requires

evidence-based exploration that would justify the shift from teacher-driven learning to leaner-

centered approaches within design programs. My personal professional experience in the field of

design education and my action-oriented worldview have led me to design a research plan that

will guide my teaching in the role of teacher-as-researcher and reflective practitioner.

In Chapter Two, I review the current research-based literature and scholarly writings that

revolve around the implementation of OBE in a global context and will describe the latest

developments of this topic and related projects in Europe and Canada. The literature review

provided the foundation for the discussion of the research design and methodology’ in Chapter
 10

Three which describes the action research tools, site and participant selection, data collection and

recording, methods for data analysis and ethical issues and considerations of this case study.

Terms and Definitions

This section introduces the terms and definitions used throughout the dissertation in

order to create coherence and a common understanding of the terminology for the purpose of the

study.

Action Research

Action research is a methodological approach, which aims to generate knowledge and

theory that in turn will inform practice. Derived from social sciences and critical theory, action

research places the practitioner in the heart of research and believes in the intellectual power of

the practitioner as researcher in production of theory. The implication of action research in

education has developed new educational research approaches with the teacher-as-researcher

movement as one of its prominent streams (Herr & Anderson, 2005).

Bologna Process

Through what became known as the Bologna Process, the European Union (EU) aimed to

develop the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010; progress toward this goal has

included initiatives supporting broad agreements on learning outcomes, increasing

standardisation of curricula for the purposes of comparability, and devising common methods for

reporting on skills, and competencies acquired through studies. The European model is being

employed in other regions of the world, and is an important development in qualification

assessment and reporting for the labour market (Lennon, 2010b, p. 3-4).

Competence
 11

The term competence has been defined as a key component of an outcomes-based

education (OBE) model. Competence and competencies are used in association with learning

outcomes (…) Competence can broadly refer to aptitude, proficiency, capability, skills and

understanding, etc. A competent person is someone with sufficient skills, knowledge and

capabilities (Adam, 2006, p. 7). Competence is being defined as “the proven ability to use

knowledge, skills and personal, social and/or methodological abilities, in work or study

situations and in professional and personal development” (Savic & Kashef, 2013, pp. 990-991).

Design

The World Design Organization (WDO) formerly known as International Council of

Societies of Industrial Design (ICSID), an organization that brings together professional

associations of designers worldwide, offers this definition (ICSID, 2017):

Design is a creative activity whose aim is to establish the multi-faceted qualities of

objects, processes, services and their systems in whole life cycles. Therefore, design is

the central factor of innovative humanisation of technologies and the crucial factor of

cultural and economic exchange. (https://wdo.org/about/history/)

Design is an activity involving a wide spectrum of professions in which products,

services, graphics, interiors and architecture all take part. The advantage of this

information is that it avoids the trap of seeing design only form the perspective of the

output (the aesthetics and appearance). It emphasizes notions of creativity , consistency,

industrial quality, and shape. Designers are specialists who have refined the ability to

conceive form and who have multidisciplinary expertise. (Borja de Mozota, 2003, p. 3).

Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO)

According to HEQCO’s website (2021), its mandate is mentioned as mentioned below:

 12

Created through the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario Act, 2005, HEQCO is

an agency of the Government of Ontario that brings evidence-based research to the

continued improvement of the postsecondary education system in Ontario. As part of its

mandate, HEQCO evaluates the postsecondary sector and provides policy

recommendations to the Ministry of Colleges and Universities to enhance the access,

quality and accountability of Ontario’s colleges and universities. (https://heqco.ca/about-

us/)

Learning

According to (Reid & Petocz, 2004),

Learning is a complex interaction between teachers and learners, teaching and learning,

and how the content and purpose of learning is understood. Every learning context

produces a set of salient differences in terms of environment, content, process and intent.

Learning is no mere acquisition of facts, but a process involving an interplay between the

students’ individual intentions, experiences and reflections, a body of professional

knowledge, institutional expectations and intended outcomes, cultural and societal

expectations, and the students’ own particular interests (p. 51).

Learning Outcomes (LO)

Lennon (2010b) states that

learning outcomes, are defined by the European Commission (2006a, p. 16) in terms of

the knowledge, skills, and competencies to be acquired, are considered “statements of

what a learner knows, understands and is able to do on completion of a learning process”

(p. 4).

Ontario Qualifications Framework (OQF)

 13

The Government of Ontario has developed a comprehensive qualifications framework

to provide students, parents, employers, and others involved in the postsecondary

education system with information on the various options and avenues of study (Ministry

of Training, Colleges and Universities, 2009a). The Ontario Qualifications Framework

(OQF) identifies themain purposes of each qualification, outlines the learning

expectations for graduates who hold each type of qualification, and shows the

relationship between the different qualifications. It is a well-developed tool that addresses

both inputs and outputs of broad program areas that may allow for general international

comparisons. (Lennon, 2010b, p. 8)

Outcomes-Based Education (OBE)

Outcomes – based education/learning is a comprehensive approach to organizing and

operating an education curriculum that is focused on and defined by the successful

demonstrations of learning sought from each student. “Outcomes are clear learning results that

we want students to demonstrate at the end of significant learning experiences and are actions

and performances that embody and reflect learner competence in using content, information,

ideas, and tools successfully” (Spady, 1994, pp.1-2).

Qualification Frameworks (QF)

Qualifications frameworks are important tools “to signal to the labour market the skills

and competencies held by graduates” (OECD, 2008, p. 261), the principal goal of a national

framework is to “achieve a better match between educational provision and the needs of the

labour market” (Young, 2007, p. 453) and to “integrate and coordinate national qualifications

subsystems and improve the transparency, access, progression and quality of qualifications in

relation to the labour market and civil society” (European Union, 2008, p. 11). “Increasingly,
 14

there is a need to ensure that qualifications frameworks are internationally compatible, because

student mobility is increasing, and each nation will have its own definition of skills, knowledge,

and competencies” (Lennon, 2010b, p. 8).

Reculturing

Reculturing is a term introduced by Fullan (2004) which refers to the process of

transforming the culture of an organization by changing the way things are being done.

Leading in a culture of change means creating a culture (not just a structure) of change.

It does not mean adopting one innovation after another; it means producing the capacity

to seek, critically assess, and selectively incorporate new ideas and practices- all the time,

and inside the organization as well as outside it. (p. 53)

 Chapter Two: Literature Review

The purpose of this study was to explore the overall challenges facing the formulation of

learning outcomes and the implementation of an effectively aligned and integrated design

curriculum with a synthesis of best practices at the case study site, George Brown College

School of Design in Toronto. Furthermore, I investigated the needs of design educators in terms

of course design, delivery, evaluation and continuous development through a reflective study of

the implementation of OBE in my own teaching praxis and professional development within the

Foundation Design II: Colour Theory & Practice course that I teach in the Art and Design

Foundation Program at the School of Design.

In this chapter, I describe the current literature on the importance of learning outcomes in

assuring the quality of teaching and learning through a critical analysis of the recent scholarly

discussions under Learning Outcomes and Quality of Learning: A Shift of Paradigm. Then, I

analyze the implementation of the OBE model in higher education with an emphasis on its role

within design education under the Impact of the OBE Model on the Quality of Teaching and

Learning.

Under the heading Implementation of Outcomes-Based Education in Postsecondary

Education, I review the outcomes of the implementation of OBE in postsecondary education

through evidenced-based research findings in Canada, Europe and the United States as well as

recommendations on policies and procedures that will facilitate the leadership of the

transformational process.

Finally, I clarify the gaps of study and justify the purpose and rationale of this research

under the Scope and Limitations of Literature Reviewed, and the need of further research for a

15
 16

better understanding of the implementation of OBE at course level using action research as my

methodology of inquiry.

Learning Outcomes and Quality of Learning: A Shift of Paradigm

In this discussion, I highlight the important role of learning outcomes in the shift from a

teaching-centered approach toward a learning-centered paradigm from the view of scholars in

this field within a global context, with an emphasis on Ontario’s postsecondary policies and

practices in the past decade.

Outcomes-Based Education: A Global Approach

Outcomes-Based Education (OBE) with its learning-centered framework has become the

dominant approach in postsecondary education (Biggs & Tang, 2007; Lennon, 2010; Liu, 2015;

Pichette & Watkins, 2018; Spady, 1994, 2020), gradually replacing the traditional teacher-

centered model in the first decade of the 21st century. What is outcomes-based education and

how does it impact the quality of teaching and learning in higher education?

In their book entitled Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Biggs and Tang

(2007) describe the nature of the OBE paradigm and explain its different objectives. They argue

while one aspect of OBE is its managerial feature that introduces OBE as a means of

benchmarking, accountability and quality assurance, the second aspect of OBE which enhances

the quality of teaching and learning has become more widespread among scholars and adapted

by educators around the world. Biggs and Tang explain that Spady first proposed OBE in 1994

as an “individualized programme for disadvantaged school students that he called ‘outcome-

based education’. Instead of teaching the standard disciplines, he set up targets for each student

to reach so that all could achieve some sort of success” (p. 5).
 17

Spady (1994) defines OBE as a comprehensive approach where “outcomes are clear

learning results that we want students to demonstrate at the end of significant learning

experiences and are actions and performances that embody and reflect learner competence in

using content, information, ideas, and tools successfully” (pp. 1-2). In this context, Spady states:

“WHAT and WHETHER students learn successfully is more important than WHEN and HOW

they learn something (p. 8)”. Spady admits “that the world is filled with examples of outcomes-

based models, and even that outcomes-based systems go back at least 500 years to the craft

guilds of the Middle Ages. The concept of outcomes-based models and systems is therefore not

new” (p. 4).

Scholars and practitioners use a variety of terminology and concepts to define the

paradigm of OBE such as outcomes-based teaching and learning (OBTL) (Biggs & Tang, 2007),

learner-centered teaching/ student-learning centered (Driscoll & Swarup, 2007; Weimer, 2013),

and student-centered learning (SCL) (Hoidn & Reusser, 2020), with the main aspect of OBE

being a shift of focus from teaching to learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p.13). Barr and Tagg (1995)

described “the learning approaches for their paradigm with descriptive qualities such as

‘holistic’, ‘environments ready for students, ‘student discovery and construction of knowledge’,

and ‘active learning’ (pp. 16-18). Morcke et al. (2012) use OBE “to cover both outcome and

competency-based education” (Morcke et al., 2012, p. 852) within a specific discipline or field of

practice such as medical education.

The re-emergence of OBE as an educational system in the 21st century is mainly rooted in

the needs of the knowledge-based economy and the skills gap reported by employers which

requires new skills set from the graduates of higher education. On one hand, “employers say they

seek students who are able to communicate, think critically and solve problems, who display
 18

resilience and creativity, and who work well in teams” (Weingarten, 2015) while on the other

hand, some scholars claim “education should not be about preparing students for employment”

(Harrison, 2017, p. 5). Furthermore, Harrison argues “whether the academy likes it or not,

students go to university in the hope that this will help them get ‘respectable jobs’, and it is often

these students (or their parents) who are most vocal in arguing they lack preparedness for the job

market” (p. 5).

Some early critics of OBE based their opposition on a belief that it has inappropriate

roots- often simply rejecting it because they see it as too behaviourist. According to Malan

(2000) in his paper The New Paradigm of Outcomes-Based Education in Perspective:

OBE is firmly rooted in past educational approaches and does not represent a paradigm

shift as advocated by OBE proponents. At best OBE can be described as an eclectic

educational philosophy taking the best from previous approaches and framing it in a new

visionary system. (p. 28)

Indeed, OBE is grounded on a variety of pedagogical approaches such as “earlier work

on educational objectives (e.g., Mager, 1962), competency-based education (e.g., Franc, 1978),

mastery learning (e.g., Block, 1971; Bloom, 1973) and criterion-referenced assessment (e.g.,

Masters & Evans, 1986), but it has synthesized and extended all these ideas” (Killen, 2000, p. 5).

However, Malan (2000) recognizes the positive aspects of OBE and endorses Spady’s

vision of OBE as a systems transformation approach.

There are many positive sides to OBE, as its transformational approach indicates. It

brings about a national focus on education as a means to an end and not an end in itself.

It forces uncoordinated and laissez-faire educational planning, managing, and teaching

practices into the background and introduces strategic educational planning that is aimed
 19

at achieving results. (p. 28)

Berlach (2004), Professor of the College of Education, University of Notre Dame in

Australia, challenges the shift to the OBE paradigm and rejects the positive aspects of this

educational model by holding to the philosophical assumptions of the advocacy/participatory

worldview. In this respect, Berlach’s action agenda for reform is rethinking the OBE paradigm.

Berlach (2000) believes that the “lack of knowledge occurs through lack of conceptual clarity”

(p. 5) while stating that “the language of OBE is the jargon of corporate business, or what Kohn

(1993) has termed the ‘market place’. It appears to be corporatisation applied to education.” He

then argues that OBE “is obsessed with accountability, or more accurately, hyper-accountability,

with everything requiring proof and an adiposity of evidence” (p. 3). Berlach finally concludes,

“the death of knowledge occurs when evidence of learning becomes more important than the

learning itself” (p. 11).

In contrast with Berlach’s rejection of OBE, Martin (2011) emphasizes the importance of

evidenced- learning approach in today’s knowledge-based economy.

Market-driven approaches emphasize the student as a customer of institutions, who

deserve certain learning outcomes by virtue of investing in the system. This approach

tends to posit quality measurement as a means to ensure accountability to the student-

customer. Academic approaches emphasize the personal and societal benefits of

educational quality, driving the measurement discussion to a quality-improvement

objective. Though students are much more than simply customers in education,

increasing reliance on tuition and ancillary fees mean that the importance of an

accountability dialogue cannot be understated. (p.1)

 20

Despite some criticism of outcome-based education in the literature, the learning

outcomes approach to teaching and learning has received strong support at an international level.

In the EUA Bologna Handbook, Kennedy et al. (2006) emphasize shift from the traditional

teacher-centred approach to a student-centered learning approach. “While traditionally the focus

was on what the teacher did, in recent years the focus has been on what students have learned

and can demonstrate at the end of a module or programme” (p. 24).

Biggs and Tang (2007) believe that the ideological neo-conservative view in most

western and some eastern countries is the basis of a different understanding of OBE which

declares that “education is a private good and therefore one should pay for it, like one does for

any other goods” (p. 1), they recognize another version of OBE which is rooted in the Dearing

Report (1997) as the one that enhances the quality of teaching and learning. Biggs and Tang refer

to this approach as outcomes-based teaching and learning (OBTL) “where outcomes are defined

specifically to enhance teaching and assessment, not to serve any other purpose” (Biggs & Tang

p. 6). The last version of OBE, referred by Biggs and Tang as constructive alignment,

emphasizes a systematic alignment of the teaching / learning activities (TAs) and the assessment

tasks (ATs) with the intended learning outcomes (ILOs) while considering the learning activities

required in the outcomes.

Origins of Outcomes-Based Education

The origins of OBE has been traced to the first cycle of advocacy and critique from the

1960s through to the 1980s in the US. “The theoretical orientation of early OBE was towards

behaviourism as represented in the works of experimental psychologists like Watson, Pavlov,

Thorndike, and Skinner, whose legacy was a focus on observable behaviours” (Morcke et al.,

2012, p. 852). Following Tyler’s emphasis on defining explicit educational objectives that
 21

would bring changes in the behaviour of students based on their learning (Tyler, 1949), Bloom

(1956) developed a classified taxonomy of communicable educational goals in the cognitive

domain organized around knowledge, skills and attitude. “It seems that the first wave of

advocacy OBE came to a head in the early 1970s with Mager’s instructional objectives (Mager,

1997), Bloom’s endorsement of mastery learning (Bloom, 1968), and Gagné’s work on

instructional design (Gagné & Briggs, 1974)” (Morcke et al., p. 852).

According to Morcke et al. (2012), by the mid-1970s, opposing views began to emerge,

questioning the role of pre-specified outcomes in measuring behaviour changes such as values,

insights and judgement that were influenced by the process of learning. Stenhouse (1975), a very

influential critic, argued

when students learned affectively, socially, culturally, aesthetically, or ethically from

experience, it was not possible to specify goals or assess them objectively but that did not

mean such types of learning were unimportant. By placing more emphasis on optimising

students’ learning than on measuring outputs or outcomes, Stenhouse (1975) was

emphasising education (literally, from the Latin origins of the word, drawing learning out

from students) as opposed to training (putting intended learning outcomes into students).

(Morcke et al., 2012, pp. 852-853)

The end of the 20th century can be considered as the revival and the advocacy phase of

OBE (Barr & Tagg, 1995; Harden, 2007; Harden et al., 1995; Spady, 1988, 1994). Based on the

behaviourist principles of the earlier competency movement, this phase was “more restrictive,

particularly regarding affects (attitudes, emotions, and values)” (Morcke et al., 2012, p. 853).

Spady (1994) called affects ‘goals’, which he distinguished from ‘outcomes’ because

they were not directly observable and could not, therefore, be included in the
 22

specification of an outcome-based curriculum. So, the revival of OBE specifically

excluded affects as learning outcomes. (Morcke et al., p. 853)

Killen (2000) in his article entitled Outcomes-Based Education: Principles and

Possibilities acknowledges Spady’s approach as the most detailed articulation of OBE “ as a

theory (or philosophy) of education in the sense that it embodies and expresses a certain set of

beliefs and assumptions about learning, teaching and the systemic structures within which these

activities take place” (p. 2).

Killen (2000) believes that an OBE framework is a total approach that places learning at

the center of education in a way that all decisions are made with the ultimate goal of creating a

successful learning environment. In this paradigm, education system and classroom practices

should be organized around “what is essential for all students to be able to do successfully at the

end of their learning experiences” (Spady, 1994, p.1).

In this scenario, outcomes influence other components of the curriculum such as the

scope and the structure of the content, the instructional methods, learning assessment tools and

the learning environment necessary to the successful achievement of the outcomes. Killen (2000)

points out four principles of OBE developed by Spady as: clarity of focus, designing back, high

expectations and expanded opportunities, and discusses the important role of these principles in

creating a learning-centered approach to teaching.

Outcomes-Based Education vs. Competency-Based Education

Moving into the first decade of the 21st century, an international movement with a high

interest in learning outcomes and measuring the competencies of graduates gained momentum.

“In the United States, interest in the skills needed for employment was heightened with the

establishment of the National Skills Standards Board of the United States, an entity created

under the Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994” (Voorhes, 2001, p. 6).
 23

Furthermore, institutions and scholars worked toward the definition of a common

language set. According to U.S. Department of Education (2001), competency was defined as

“a combination of skills, abilities, and knowledge needed to perform a specific task” (p. 1),

while Voorhes (2001) used “the term performance-based learning… as a framework for

learning systems that seek to document that a learner has attained a given competency or set

of competencies” (p. 8).

In the model proposed by Voorhes which was emerged from the U.S. Department of

Education’s report (2001)

traits and characteristics constitute the foundation for learning and depict the innate

makeup of individuals on which further experiences can be built… Competencies,

then, are the result of integrative learning experiences in which skills, abilities, and

knowledge interact to form learning bundles that have currency in relation to the

task for which they are assembled. Finally, demonstrations are the results of applying

competencies. It is at this level that performance-based learning can be assessed.

(Voorhes, 2001, pp. 8-9)

Similarly, “the Dearing Report (1997) captures the debate in the United Kingdom

about lifelong learning and the necessity for portability of skills” (Voorhes, 2001, p. 6).

Furthermore, the Bologna Process and its subsequent aspects and strategies explore “how

universities are addressing issues of modernizing the university system and focuses on learning

outcomes through the Tuning Project, which sets outcomes for programs and educational

systems” (Lennon, 2010b, p. 12).

In the Tuning project (Cumming & Ross, 2007), learning outcomes and competencies

are used as interchangeable and defined from two points of view:

learning outcomes are set and described by teaching staff and relate to a particular
 24

component… competencies belong to students or graduates rather than teachers. The

competencies of someone who has successfully completed a degree programme should be

at least equivalent to the prescribed learning outcomes. (Morcke et al., 2012, p. 856)

While the proponents of OBE propose an incremental shift of approach within the

traditional standard lengths of the academic term and credit hour measures of student

achievement, the educational competency-based model is questioning the core structures of

the traditional postsecondary education (Dearing, 1997; Gallagher, 2016a; Harrison, 2017;

Pichette, 2019; Pichette & Watkins, 2018; Voorhees, 2001).

Similar to OBE, competency-based education (CBE)

is all about outcomes, focusing on what students know and can do. Students in CBE

programs advance or earn a credential when they demonstrate mastery of clearly defined

learning outcomes and are provided with the resources to get there at their own pace.

(Pichette & Watkins, 2018, p. 5)

Instead of content, OBE and CBE systems are both structured around predetermined

learning outcomes with a close relationship with the competencies needed to be demonstrated

upon the completion of the program of learning.

Some US universities have for some time been paying attention to students’

competencies. In what has become known as competency-based education (CBE),

students are expected to achieve mastery of competency. A demonstration of mastery

requires both a precise and clear definition of the competency and a measurable learning

outcome (hence my suggestion that CBE has clear links to learning outcomes); until

mastery is demonstrated, the student does not proceed. (Harrison, 2017, p. 8)

In the article entitled How competency-based training locks the working class out of

powerful knowledge: A modified Bernsteinian Analysis, Wheelahan explores the competency-

 25

based training (CBT) in vocational education and training (VET) in Australia based on a previous

research (Wheelahan & Moodie, 2005) that shows the “the social composition of the VET and

higher education sectors is different in Australia. Students from low socio-economic backgrounds

are under-represented in higher education, while the VET sector is more representative of the

broader community” (Wheelahan, 2007, p. 11).

Wheelahan (2007) argues CBT in VET in Australia “excludes the working class and

other disadvantaged social groups from access to powerful knowledge, because it denies students

access to the structuring principles of disciplinary knowledge” (p. 1). Investigating the role of

social justice in the implementation of CBT within VET, Wheelahan grounds her argument on

Bernstein’s critical analysis of the structure and content of knowledge, the way different types of

knowledge are acquired and produced under specific social conditions, how they influence the

democratic access to disciplinary knowledge and how the style of reasoning within disciplinary

structures of knowledge affects the control of knowledge by future graduates in the workplace.

Referring to Bates et al. (1998), and Jones and Moore (1995), Wheelahan (2007) uses

Bernstein’s and critical realism to analyze

the way in which the language of progressivism was transformed through its

incorporation into the ‘new vocationalism’, and resulted in the ‘controlled

vocationalism’ of current VET policy in England and in Australia, in ways that reinforce

the power of employers. (Wheelahan, p. 11)

Wheelahan (2007) believes that focus on specific content and lack of access to the style

of reasoning within the generative knowledge of a discipline deepen class divisions in Australia.

A social justice strategy in Australia must not be premised solely on increasing access to

higher education for working class students, although this is important. It must also be
 26

premised on overturning competency-based training as the mandated model of

curriculum for all VET qualifications, and emphasising once again the importance of

disciplinary knowledge as a component of VET qualifications. Electricians need to think

like mathematicians, and community development workers like sociologists. We need to

value the depth and complexity of knowledge needed for vocational practice in the same

we do for professional practice. (p. 11)

The review of the literature shows a close relationship between the underlying principles

of OBE and CBE which in some cases make them interchangeable. However, McClarty and

Gaertner (2015) argue that while CBE offers a higher level of flexibility in terms of time

constraints and the requirement of credit hours that is still the basis of measurement in the higher

education system in most of the western world, it also emphasizes the level of mastery and

different levels of achievements which provide future employers with a level of benchmark

needed in the job application. In the US,

students’ inability to afford the cost of the conventional university credits, anything that

takes less time and costs them less money is surely a good thing. Canada is quite

different from the US insofar as it does not experience the problem of students leaving

university without a degree to anything even remotely comparable. This perhaps explains

why CBE has not attracted as much attention in this country. (Harrison, 2017, p. 9)

Despite the different versions of OBE and their implications in the higher education sectors

around the world, OBE has established itself, mostly in the western postsecondary education, in

an incremental fashion, while new approaches in the integration of OBE and CBE models are

gaining momentum in North America (Harrison, 2017; Hoidn & Reusser, 2020; Pichette &

Watkins, 2018) as alternative educational systems that provide flexible learning structures to fit
 27

the reality of future of work within the knowledge-based economy of the 21st century. Regarding

the current mandated OBE model in Ontario colleges which is based on credit hours and my

study which is about the implementation of a learning outcomes-based approach in an Ontario

college, I have focused my study on the investigation of the OBE model in my teaching practice.

However, I believe the possibilities offered by CBE in shaping the future of education and

transition to a more flexible relationship between the educational system and the job market has

potential for further research with the purpose of implementation and policy-making in the

postsecondary sector in Ontario (Harrison, 2017; Pichette, 2019; Pichette & Watkins, 2018).

Learning Outcomes and Qualification Frameworks: Ontario’s Perspective

The Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO)’s conference on Measuring

the Value of a Postsecondary Education held on May 2011 in Toronto, gathered academics,

policy-makers and administrators in an attempt to discuss the role of Ontario’s postsecondary

education sector and related institutions in producing tangible learning outcomes and the

frameworks that have been adopted internationally to assess these outcomes.

As outcomes-based measurement is still a developing field, no single or standard

typology is used to determine graduates’ achievement of skills and competencies and the

knowledge gained. However, the broad themes commonly held as indicators of learning and

achievement in higher education can be broadly divided into cognitive and non-cognitive

outcomes.

While cognitive outcomes are referred to the development of skills and knowledge

known as knowledge outcomes and skills outcomes; the non-cognitive outcomes include

other activities that serve to support the development of students – including psychosocial
 28

development, attitudes and values, employability, and occupational competence (Lennon,

2010, p. 4).

In my review of the literature on learning outcomes I identified a number of similar

definitions of the term that do not differ significantly from each other. Kennedy et al. (2006)

state, “From these definitions, it is clear that learning outcomes focus on what the learner has

achieved rather that the intentions of the teacher and what the learner can demonstrate at the end

of a learning activity.” (p. 5)

Lennon’s (2010) study mentions the importance of developing common definitions

“when stating expectations about learning outcomes, transparency in communication of goals

and accomplishments both prior to and following education and training, and the mobility of

students within education systems and institutions, nationally and internationally. (Lennon,

2010b, p. 3)

Therefore, Lennon (2010) affirms that the “The Ontario Qualifications Framework

(OQF) identifies the main purposes of each qualification, outlines the learning expectations for

graduates who hold each type of qualification, and shows the relationship between the different

qualifications” (pp. 5-8).

Lennon further emphasizes the need for adopting similar strategies in Ontario in

developing standard methods that will recognize specific credentials and will help to identify a

graduate’s competencies vis-à-vis stated learning outcomes and supporting employer’s with

measurable tools in hiring the most competent graduates. The report entitled Tuning: Identifying

and Measuring Sector-Based Learning Outcomes in Postsecondary Education completed by

Lennon et al. (2014) which includes multidisciplinary participants identifies a strong need of

such initiatives in Ontario.

 29

Impact of the OBE Model on the Quality of Teaching and Learning

In this section, I first explore the structure of the OBE model by its comparison with the

traditional teaching-centered system and an overview of its impact on the approach to teaching

and learning in post-secondary education through the thoughts of prominent scholars in this field.

Then, I investigate the potential impact of a learning-centered model on design education

through the study of the specific aspects of design education that should be considered within an

OBE model. Finally, I analyze the interconnection between design education and an OBE

approach in educating design in higher education.

Principles of Outcomes-Based Education

An overview of the impact of OBE on the approaches to teaching and learning in post-

secondary education identifies that clarity of focus, as the first principle of OBE, directs the

attention of teachers toward learners’ successful achievement of outcomes instead of the mere

acquisition of knowledge practiced within the traditional teaching-centered paradigm where

“teaching effectiveness is generally measured by the student’s knowledge” (Savic & Kashef,

2013, p. 988). In this way, teachers become facilitators of learning rather than transmitters of

knowledge who help students to find, understand and analyze relevant information, and to

transform it into their own personal knowledge.

The second principle of OBE is designing back, which starts from a clear articulation of

course level learning outcomes that in turn should be meaningful, significant, and appropriate,

and aligned with the overall outcomes of the program of study. This principle creates a

systematic framework for designing higher education curricula where “all planning, teaching and

assessment decisions should be linked directly to the significant outcomes that students are

ultimately to achieve” (Killen, 2000, p. 3). In this perspective, teachers are not concerned with
 30

covering the curriculum that is often linked very closely to a subject-based textbook and

practiced within a content-based programming where the selection of contents takes priority over

learning outcomes and creative teaching strategies.

The third principle establishes high expectations that encourage students to become

deeply engaged with the learning process and transform them into effective learners. “Bandura

(2006) refers to effective learners as active agents who ‘construct knowledge’, which entails

setting goals, analyzing tasks, planning strategies and monitoring self-learning and development”

(Savic & Kashef, 2013, p. 988).

Setting high expectations and challenging standards of performance does not refer to

creating impossible tasks and activities, but rather motivating students to be purposeful, useful

and challenging in order to achieve success. This view is based on the idea that successful

learning promotes more successful learning. “When students experience success, it reinforces

their learning, builds their confidence and encourages them to accept further learning challenges”

(Killen, 2000, p. 3).

The fourth principle maintains that teachers must aim to provide all learners with

expanded opportunities. This principle is based on the concept that not all leaners have the

ability to learn the same things in the same way and in the same time. In this context where

student’s learning becomes the main objective of teaching, what really matters is that students

learn the important things not that they learn them in a specific manner or by some arbitrary

point in time.

This idea is challenged by the traditional teaching-centered approach that requires

students to learn certain materials in fixed periods of time “regardless of how much there was to
 31

learn, what they knew before they started, how difficult the content was to understand, how

quickly they learned, or what they knew when the end came” (Killen, 2000 p. 7).

Impact of OBE on Design Education

In my analysis of OBE principles and framework I identified that a clear and

unambiguous definition of learning outcomes is the most crucial activity and the first step of an

OBE planning process. Spady (1994) who believes that ‘‘Outcome-Based Education means

clearly focusing and organizing everything in an educational system around what is essential for

all students to be able to do successfully at the end of their learning experiences”, relies heavily

on Benjamin Bloom’s taxonomy in Bloom at. al (1956).

Bloom’s taxonomy is the most quoted taxonomies in the educational field and provides

simple, precise, effective, and measurable hierarchical structural categories of educational

objectives that are incorporated within three intellectual domains: cognitive, affective, and

psychomotor (Savic & Kashef, 2013). Learning outcomes, which are defined based on

knowledge, skills and competencies “are not values, beliefs, attitudes or psychological states of

mind. Instead, outcomes are what learners can actually do with what they know and have

learned” (Spady, 1994, p. 2).

A clear understanding of knowledge, skills and competences as key constructs of learning

outcomes, and the interconnections between them is central to the definition of learning

outcomes. Based on the European Qualification Framework (EPC 2008, p. C111/4), while

knowledge is defined as “the outcome of the assimilation of information through learning” and

“represents the body of facts, principles, theories and practices that is related to a field of work or

study”; skills have been recognized as “the ability to apply knowledge and use know-how to

complete tasks and solve problems”. Therefore, competence is defined as “the proven ability to
 32

use knowledge, skills and personal, social and/or methodological abilities, in work or study

situations and in professional and personal development” (Savic & Kashef, 2013, pp. 990-991).

Bloom et al (1956) have placed utmost emphasis on the cognitive domain with six

categories of educational objectives that can coexist during the learning process: knowledge,

comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Bloom and associates

(Krathwohl et al., 1973) have identified five main categories within the affective domain, which

represents emotional aspect of behaviour in learning: receiving phenomena, responding to

phenomena, valuing, organizing, and internalizing/personalizing a value system. The

psychomotor domain was not developed directly by Bloom himself but was analyzed and

described by his students and primarily by Krathwohl. According to Simpson (1972), the

psychomotor domain could include six categories: perception, set, guided response, mechanism,

complex overt response, adaptation, and origination (pp. 993-995).

Each profession requires specific sets of knowledge, skills and competences. The raison

de vivre of outcomes-based education is in its adaptable pedagogical framework, which has the

capacity to bridge education to the real life experience as well as the professional career that one

chooses to pursue. In this context, the question is, What are the significant outcomes that should

be specifically considered in the planning of a design-based curriculum?

Design seeks to discover and assess structural, organizational, functional, expressive and

economic relationships, with the task of enhancing global sustainability and

environmental protection (global ethics); giving benefits and freedom to the entire human

community, individual and collective; final users, producers and market protagonists

(social ethics); supporting cultural diversity despite the globalization of the world

(cultural ethics); giving products, services and systems, those forms that are expressive of
 33

(semiology) and coherent with (aesthetics) their proper complexity. (Borja de Mozota,

2003, p. 3)

According to Savic and Kashef (2013), the design studio has its roots in the medieval

artisans’ workshops and royal renaissance academics, where the transfer of knowledge and skills

occurred through the master-apprentice relationship, and constitutes the didactic model for

design education. The idea of learning by doing that has been the core practice in design

education throughout the 20th century as well as through the first decades of 21st century, has

developed an innovative and flexible mode of learning that encompasses a repository of

knowledge as well as a wide range of skills and competences within both cognitive and affective

domains.

The current teaching approach in design education involves realistic or simulated design

experiences that enhance the students’ learning experience within the studio culture where

“knowledge and intellectual skills are acquired in a similar way, and are inseparable. It is not

possible to make a clear-cut division between them; as the level of knowledge applicability

increases, it is becoming closer to skills” (Savic & Kashef, 2013, p. 1001).

Table 1 depicts Borja de Mozota’s (2010) construct of designer’s competencies.

 34

Table 1

Knowledge Attitude Values Applied skills Understanding

skills
Design process Risk-taking Practical design skills Observation
Managing Prototyping
uncertainty Drawing ability
Experimentation
Material Originality Creative techniques Researching
Lateral thinking
Market Anticipating future Commercial skills Logical thinking
trends
Forward thinking
Technology Proactive in Communication skills Framing problems
developing
relationships
User awareness Open-minded Computer skills Scenario building
Narrative
Culture Understanding Design for manufacture Synthesizing
multidisciplinary Holistic thinking
context
Aesthetic Focusing on Project management Initiative taking &
awareness usability action
Human factors Attention to detail Optimization Consumer needs
Manufacturing Learning from errors Team work Human empathy
Designer’s Competencies: in italics, the strategic skills for design now (Borja de Mozota, 2010)

Source: Borja de Mozota, 2010.

The definition of the design profession and the nature of studio-based education in design

suggest that some very important cognitive terms such as creativity, imagination, originality,

innovation, ethics and aesthetics should be considered within an OBE implementation process.

This raises some important questions. How do we construct measurable learning outcomes that

capture the nature of these terms? How do we measure someone’s experience of something?
 35

How do we enable students to understand the concept of creativity/ imagination/ originality and

how do we measure them? (Davies, 2012, p. 3).

Measuring the Value of Design: A Research-Based Design Value Model

In the paper entitled Value of Design Competencies Within an Outcomes-Based

Education, Mousavi Hejazi and Borja de Mozota (2015) investigated the value of design skills in

the business of design to understand the competencies needed in the industry after graduating

from design disciplines. How design activity brings value to business?

The Four Powers of Design Model developed by Borja De Mozota (2006) based on the

Balanced Scorecard (BSC)- a widely adopted management and strategic planning tool created by

Drs. David Norton and Robert Kaplan (of the Harvard Business School)- promotes the value of

design within four perspectives of the BSC framework:

1. Design as Transformer (aligned with BSC’s Learning and Growth Perspective) identifies

how design creates new futures.

2. Design as Integrator (aligned with BSC’s Process Perspective) showcases how design

builds connections, either interpersonal or intellectual or process.

3. Design as Differentiator (aligned with BSC’s Customer Perspective) highlights how

design helps to stand out in a crowd.

4. Design as Good Business (aligned with BSC’s Financial Perspective) how design affects

the bottom line. (Visocky J. & K., 2013, pp. 75-77)

In Canada, a study of the role of design entitled Why Invest in Design? Insights From

Industry Leaders conducted by Ontario’s Design Industry Advisory Committee (Gould et al.,

2014) working with the Martin Prosperity Institute at the Rotman School of Management,

University of Toronto and financially supported by Industry Canada shed light on the impacts
 36

and benefits of investing in design. This research project was a case study of internationally

recognized Canadian industries that are working at the cutting edge of innovation through in-

depth interviews of their leaders who believe that “Design is an enabling discipline, and

designers working with professionals from other disciplines add value to the process and to the

end result” (Gould et al., 2014, p.3). The in-depth interviews are based on a questionnaire that

focus on the role of design in corporate strategy, financial investment, innovation and new

product development, manufacturing process and corporate culture.

Based on 10 positive indicators of design investment, the findings of this study underline

the benefits of implementation of design, as the core activity of the organization and re-define

design as: long-term & short-term, disruptive, embedded, intensely focused, owned, tested, based

on technology & materials, process, holistic, diverse. The synthesis of the findings of this

qualitative research (Gould et al., 2014) displays five main characteristics of the design activity

from the point of view of the decision-makers within top Canadian industries:

1. Design as a catalyst for change that adds financial value to the organization and create

differentiation;

2. Design as a vision for long-term investment and quality excellence;

3. Design as enabler which makes technology accessible to users;

4. Design as a holistic approach that brings together all disciplines and a diverse creative

talent pool;

5. Design as a sophisticated process, which supports a systematic approach to the efficient

management of the company and its human, physical and financial resources. (pp. 9-10)

While research-based studies show the crucial role of design in adding value to

businesses, there are corporate clients who still consider design schools as idea boxes and
 37

not as schools where students learn the skills that will help them to become experts in a

specific profession. (Mousavi Hejazi & Borja de Mozota, 2015, p. 7)

How design schools of the 21st century can ensure the business world that their graduates

have acquired specific knowledge, skills and attitudes that make them ready to practice design as

a profession and become an expert in their field? and What are the specific competencies of

designers which make them unique and different from other professionals?

Bruce Archer (2005) defines Design with a capital D as

the collected experience of the material culture and the collected body of experience, skill

and understanding embodied in the arts of planning, inventing, making and doing…

Design has its own distinct ‘things to know’, ‘ways of knowing them’ and ‘ways of

finding out about them’. (Cross, 2006, p. 17).

Design has been defined as both “an activity (the design process) and the outcome of that

activity or process (a plan or form)” (Borja De Mozota, 2003, p. 3). According to Bernsen (1987)

a designer is “a creator of form who understands creation in the context of predefined

imperatives established by other professionals and places human values over technological ones

“(Borja De Mozota, 2003, pp. 4-5). Therefore, design becomes “a process of creation and

decision making and cannot be replaced by other activities or professions” (p. 5).

In this context, the perception of design graduates of their own competencies and

aptitudes becomes paramount in the recognition of their expertise by the business world and

other institutions in general.

Creativity and Learning Outcomes in Design Education

The importance of idea generation as a new way to sell design to business, demonstrates

that the creative problem-solving skill is one of the backbones of designer’s competencies. In
 38

order to measure creativity as one of the most crucial aspect of design activity and an important

outcome of design education, we need to come up with an understanding of the meaning and

sub-meanings of creativity and creative thinking.

The review of literature on creativity shows “finding a definition for creativity that meets

all frames of reference, contexts and purposes is either impossible, or at best limited, and

Bleakley’s (2004) argument for plural conceptions of creativity seems convincing” (Philip, 2013,

p. 362).

Creativity like design can be defined from two points of view: as a process and/or as

demonstrated through a final creative production. According to Botella et al. (2018), while some

scholars of creativity have studied “the artistic process (Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi, 1976; Mace

& Ward, 2002; Patrick, 1937; Yokochi & Okada, 2005), others have focused on the creative

process (Howard et al., 2008; Osborn, 1953, 1963; Runco & Dow, 1999; Wallas, 1926)” (p. 1).

These two types of processes may be, however, somewhat distinct from each other

because the creative process is not always dedicated to artistic creation, and productive

work in the arts may not always involve creativity, in terms of specifically original

thinking. (Botella et al., 2018, p.1)

Botella et al. (2018) in their article entitled What are the stages of the creative process?

What visual students are saying? review some models of creativity (Botella et al., 2016; Lubart

et al., 2015; Stanko-Kaczmarek, 2012) and study the stages of the creative process through

observation and interview “to identify the specific nature of artistic creative process and to

determine what are the basic stages of this kind of process” (p.1) with an emphasis on creativity

as a model of problem solving.

 39

While Guilford (1950) proposed a program of research concerning the identification,

measurement and validation of some creativity-relevant abilities such as sensitivity to problems,

capacity to produce many ideas, ability to change one’s mental set, ability to re-organize, ability

to deal with complexity and ability to evaluate; Lubart (2001) believes that our understanding of

the abilities and basic cognitive processes involved in creativity has been broadly developed in

the past 50 years.

Traditionally, the complete creative act involves four important steps identified as

preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. Other diverse proposals about the creative

process have focused on the processes of idea generation and idea evaluation. The creative

problem-solving framework developed from Osborn’s (1953) work, proposed a stage-based view

of the creative process.

Guilford (1967) proposed a model of problem solving that addressed creative production

as a process that consists of:

• an initial stage of filtering (attention aroused and directed),

• a stage of cognition (the problem is sensed and structured),

• a stage of production (ideas are generated with divergent and convergent thinking

involved),

• another stage of cognition (new information is obtained) followed by another stage of

production, in a cycle that can continue until the task is completed.

• A process of evaluation is hypothesized to occur between each of the stages just

described. Finally, work will stop once a satisfying solution is obtained. (Barbot et. al,

2011)
 40

However, a recent reformulation of creative models move away from the idea of a fixed

sequence of activities in favor of three macro-sets of processes, which are understanding the

problem, generating ideas and planning for action. The sequence in which these processes occur

can vary across problem tasks or problem solvers in regard to the environment and context where

the creative process takes place. (Barbot et. al; 2011, Botella et al.; 2018; Lubart, 2001)

Although the study conducted by Botella et al. (2018)

was limited by the interview method— and thus focused on students’ implicit theories

of their own creative process—it allowed us to identify multiple stages in the process of

visual artistic creativity. Because of the implicit theories and the number of models

suggesting a linear sequence of stages, sometimes with some loops or cycles possible, it

seems too ambitious to understand the sequence of the stages from interviews. The

present study invites us to rethink what composes an artistic creative process. (p. 11)

The review of the literature shows the analysis of creativity as a process that comprises

sequence-based but flexible sub-processes demonstrates that creativity in design education

should be considered within both cognitive and affective domains of learning outcomes. The

question is: How do we as design educators plan our teaching so that creativity is enhanced in

the process of learning and is evident in the products of learning?

According to Davies (2012), if we recognize creativity as one of the main design

competencies that should be learned in design education, the value of this competency can be

measured through the alignment of learning outcomes and assessment methods within project-

based design courses. In this context, outcomes should be related to cognition that comprise both

knowledge content and understanding as well as to abilities and skills that comprise those

attributes commonly known as transferable skills, key skills, core skills.

 41

Where learning is about becoming a designer, students tend to experiment with processes

and consider the outcome of learning to be about innovation and change. Their focus is mostly

on the discovery of a personal identity, self-expression, reflection and research, and the

integration and expansion of ideas (thinking) and practice (doing). They also actively work

toward the production of a form that can be recognized as creative. In order to capture the whole

learning experience, educators should plan assessment criteria that articulate the complexity of

the creative process within different levels of achievement upon which the student can build in

later projects. In another word, we need to plan the alignment of what has been achieved

(learning outcomes) and how well students performed as a result of tackling the learning

outcomes (assessment criteria).

The Issue of Assessing Creativity

The review of the literature shows that the assessment of creativity which is one of the

most important aspects of creative thinking and creative work is directly related to the way

creativity is being defined by the researchers in this field (Amabile, 1982, 1996, 2018;

Csikszentmihalyi, 1996; Gardner, 1994; Gruber, 1982; Mumford & Gustafson, 1988, 2007;

Mumford et al., 2012; Runco, 2018; Runco & Jaeger, 2012; Sternberg & Lubart, 1995).

According to Lubart (2018),

In terms of a working definition, creativity is defined as the ability to produce work that

is original and valuable in its context. Creativity exists, however, at the interface between

an individual (or small group) that produces work, which is more or less appreciated by

the producer him/ herself, and others in the proximal or distal social world. This approach

is essentially relativistic, and interactionist. (p. 134)

 42

The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) which is coordinated by the

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental

organization of industrialized countries, defines creative thinking as “the competence to engage

productively in the generation, evaluation and improvement of ideas, that can result in original and

effective solutions, advances in knowledge and impactful expressions of imagination” (PISA,

2021, p. 8).

In addition to originality, effective interpretation of experience and the construction of

meaning which tie creativity to learning, authenticity is mentioned as a requirement “to avoid

questions such as ‘creative for whom’, which often arise and can be directed to both originality

and effectiveness” (Runco, 2018, p. 249).

According to Barbot et al. (2011),

It is today accepted that no single ability or trait is the key to creativity. Indeed,

creativity involves a combination of cognitive (information processing), conative

(personality traits, motivational aspects), and emotional factors (affective state, trait)

that are interacting dynamically with the environment… resulting in the uniqueness

of the creative process and product. (p.59)

Since the mid 20th century (Guilford, 1950), creativity and its assessment has been mostly

tackled from the viewpoint of psychologists who believe that creativity can be measured and

developed. From the 60’s and later the 90’s, the literature witnessed a growing increase of

the description and definition of the concept, development of measures and

assessment techniques, including major works that strongly influenced the field

nowadays (Guilford, 1967; Torrance, 1966; Wallach & Kogan, 1965). However, in

the 90’s, the creativity research literature increased exponentially with the

appearance of new scientific journals, international conferences and book series on

 43

the topic, which coincided on the other hand, with significant progress in

psychometric science. (Barbot et al., 2011, p. 58)

Measurement has a crucial role in assessing the quality of teaching and learning that

occur in the realm of creativity and creative thinking. According to Isaksen et al. (1993), many

assessment tools such as tests, inventories, rating scales, and checklists that purported to measure

some aspect of creativity or its correlates have been developed to assess various aspects of

creativity, creative thinking, processes and products.

In Authentic Creativity: Mechanisms, Definitions, and Empirical Efforts, Runco (2018)

begins with the question of how creativity matters to individuals and society in order to discuss

how to best measure and develop creativity. Runco believes in the universality of creativity and

identifies four reasons why creativity matters. The first reason is that creativity empowers

humans with the ability to deal with change by creating new understandings and thus to adapt.

Secondly, by building upon creative efforts, creativity allows advance and evolution. The third

reason how creativity matters is its support of both individual and societal health, and ultimately,

the quality of life (Simonton, 1997). Finally, creativity is crucial as it is associated with both

formal and informal learning.

Furthermore, Runco (2018)

rejects the assumption that creative potential is only important because it may eventually

lead to actual creative performances- is to refer back to everyday creativity, authenticity,

and personal creativity. These are expressions of a creative capacity that may not be

socially recognized, and they may not involve any productivity, but they are quite

important- and quite common. (p. 259)

Based on this theory that defines creativity as a capacity of people to be creatively

productive, Runco uses divergent thinking tests in most of his empirical measurement to best
 44

assess creative potentials (Acar & Runco, 2014, 2015, 2017; Runco, 1986; Runco et al., 2011).

While most assessment of creative thinking focuses on measuring divergent thinking cognitive

processes, “the literature clearly highlights that convergent thinking cognitive processes, such as

analytical and evaluative skills are also important for creative production (Cropley, 2006; Reiter-

Palmon & Robinson, 2009; Tanggard & Glaveanu, 2014)” (PISA, 2021, p. 12).

Furthermore, Lubart (2018) identifies thinking – divergent – exploratory and convergent

– integrative as two interconnected modes that take place within the creative process based on

his research on individual differences in creative potential (Botella & Lubart, 2016; Lubart &

Getz, 1997). While, the measurement of the individual’s creative potential is important in the

assessment of the creative thinking process, the assessment of the creative effort’s outcome is

also equally valued and studied. According to the PISA report (2021), “Achieving creative

outcomes requires the capacity to engage in creative thinking, but it can also demand a wider and

more specialised set of attributes and skills, such as intelligence, domain knowledge or artistic

talent” (p. 8).

According to Balchin (2005),

Creativity assessment might be regarded as an attempt to recognize or identify creative

characteristics or abilities among people, or to understand their creative strengths and

potentials. Measurement might play a specific role in creativity assessment to the extent

that specific tests, inventories, or rating scales provide evidence to help answer such

questions. (p. 1)

Thus, my review of the literature (Balchin, 2008; Fryer, 2006; Oliver, 2011) suggests

educators may not necessarily have the skills and knowledge to develop their own creative

pedagogical practice, to develop students’ creativity, or to adequately measure and assess

 45

creativity. In this context, the articulation of learning outcomes is a way that fosters these

specifically cognitive design-oriented attributes as well as their measurement; this becomes a

significant challenge that will affect the whole teaching-learning process within an OBE model.

In conclusion, outcomes-based education is a creative and visionary educational model

that has its roots in a variety of past pedagogical approaches with an emphasis on learning

outcomes as the central core of its philosophy. In this model, the successful occurrence of

students’ learning becomes the basis of all teaching decisions fostered by an innovative

implementation of OBE principles such as high expectations and expanded opportunities that

suggest evaluating how well students learn rather than how much they learn.

While the current definition of learning outcomes in most disciplines is based on Bloom’s

taxonomy of the cognitive domain, the nature of a design-based education requires a new

dimension of cognitive domain that interacts with the affective domain. Therefore, design

education needs to develop an integrated outcomes model that places the design studio and its

attributes at the core of its curriculum planning, and facilitates teaching practices that are

learning-centered.

Implementation of Outcomes-Based Education in Postsecondary Education

In this section, I discuss the framework of the implementation of the outcomes-based

model by a critical examination of current models and best practices in this field based on a

critical review of the challenges and barriers that teachers face at both faculty and institution

levels as well as some potential strategies that will facilitate the implementation process and

bring about a culture of change.

Framework of the Implementation of the Outcomes-Based Model

 46

Biggs and Tang’s (2007) categorization of OBE approaches since its emergence in the

1990s and its evolution in different higher education systems throughout the 21st century indicate

a synthesis of two distinct and sometime opposing frameworks: one of quality assurance (QA)

which emphasizes the managerial aspect of OBE at the institutional level and its other aspect that

enhances the quality of learning and teaching (QE) at a particular course and/or programme

level. Biggs and Tang (2007) argue that while QA procedures tend to be retrospective and are

concerned mostly with maintaining the quality of education, and measuring the value of higher

education;

quality enhancement is prospective, concerned with reviewing not only how well the

whole institution works in achieving its mission, but also how it may keep improving in

doing so. An effective quality enhancement system pre-empts the need for quality

assurance. (p. 263)

In this context, the question that arises is how will institutions reconcile the managerial

role of OBE for benchmarking institutions, for accountability and credit transfers with its role in

enhancing the quality of teaching and learning?

Barr and Tagg (1995) describe the learning-centered paradigm as “one in which the goal

is for our institutions to operate like learners, continuously learning how to produce more

learning” (p. 16). They believe that this learning-centered paradigm should be holistic and

promote environments ready for students, student discovery and construction of knowledge, and

active learning. While many educators have and are still embracing the outcomes-based model as

the enhancement of the quality of teaching and learning, there have been some concerns and

oppositions from the faculty, administrators and even some students who resent the OBE
 47

approach that are based on the misconceptions and misapplications of this model (McKenna &

Quinn, 2020).

The main criticism of the implementation of an outcomes-based model arises from its

approach to assessment and the overall question of measurement that makes it challenging.

There are those who argue, “true education cannot be measured” (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 18).

For them, “the term ‘outcomes’ gives the image of a factory model in which something is

produced rather than developed” (Driscoll & Wood, 2007, p. 9). Thus, outcomes-based

assessment has become the equivalent of rigid rubrics, behavioural objectives, tightly contained

curricula, and reduction of education to quantitative measurement. They conclude that an OBE

model is highly prescriptive, for both learners and educators, thereby inhibiting creativity and

flexibility (p. 9). In fact, the opposite is true. The goal of a learning-focused curriculum that aims

at the successful achievement of the outcomes by all students implies that teachers should

develop innovative and creative teaching strategies and methods in order to help students to

achieve that goal.

Learning outcomes help teachers to tell students more precisely what is expected of them;

help students to learn more effectively; help teachers to design their materials more

effectively by acting as a template for them; make it clear what students can hope to gain

from following a particular course or lecture; help teachers select the appropriate teaching

strategy matched to the intended learning outcome; help teachers to tell their colleagues

more precisely what a particular activity is designed to achieve; ensure that appropriate

teaching and assessment strategies are employed. (Jenkins and Unwin, 1996, n.p.)

If we recognize that the OBE model represents a holistic and total approach to teaching

and learning, the framework of constructive alignment, proposed by Biggs and Tang (2007),
 48

suggests a strong basis for a systematic development of implementation processes across the

whole institution, from the classroom level to administrative procedures and regulations. What is

constructive alignment? According to Biggs and Tang, constructive alignment is a marriage

between a constructivist understanding of the nature of learning and an aligned design for

teaching that is designed to lock students into deep learning” (p. 4).

Biggs and Tang (2007) propose four stages of implementation: a) description of the

intended learning outcomes (ILOs) in the form of a verb (learning activity), its object (the

content) and specification of the context and a standard the students are to attain; b) creating a

learning environment using teaching/learning environment activities (TLAs) that address that

verb and therefore are likely to bring about the intended outcome; c) using assessment tasks

(ATs) that also contain that verb, thus enabling the teacher to judge with the help of rubrics if

and how well students’ performances meet the criteria; d) transforming these judgments into

standard grading criteria (pp. 50-58).

The implementation of an outcomes-based education, which promotes the practice of

constructive alignment between outcomes, learning activities and assessment tools needs an

environment where all stakeholders (teachers, students, and the institution) are engaged in the

process of transformative reflection and constant action. Each of these participants reflects in

interaction with the others in three domains- teacher and student, teacher, and institution, student,

and institution- that would have built-in quality enhancement and mechanisms for not only

assuring quality but for enhancing quality (Biggs & Tang, 2007, pp. 247-251).

The University of Guelph in Ontario has developed a curriculum mapping software tool

(CurricKitTM) designed to assess the intended and delivered curriculum across a sequence of

courses.
 49

It distributes a questionnaire, asking each instructor the following questions: What

methods of instruction do you use in your course? What methods of assessment are used

in your course? Which program-level learning outcomes are developed in your course?

What level of complexity/depth is expected for each of the learning outcomes? Please

specify how each of the learning outcomes are taught and assessed in your course.

(Kenny & Desmarais, 2012, p. 3)

According to Kenny and Desmarais (2012), “Curriculum mapping provides an

opportunity for instructors to reflect upon and have meaningful discussions about the curriculum

and to engage in broader discussions related to teaching and learning within their discipline” (p.

3). By asking questions and engaging teachers in a reflective process of self-evaluation, decision-

makers at the institutional level create an environment of reflection and collaboration where a

“conversation about student learning feels safe, important, and relevant to our faculty work”

(Driscoll & Wood, 2007, p. 11).

Outcomes-Based Education and Leadership of Change

The implementation of a learning-centered approach within an environment, which

practices the traditional teacher-centered style, requires a leadership of cultural change.

Reculturing, a term adopted by Fullan (2007) in defining the transformation of the culture,

targets the cultural structure of the organization which means changing the way things are done.

Effective leaders know that the hard work of reculturing is the sine qua non of progress.

Furthermore, it is a particular kind of reculturing for which we strive: one that activates

and deepens moral purpose through collaborative work cultures that respect differences

and continually build and test knowledge against measurable results - a culture within
 50

which one realizes that sometimes being off balance is a learning moment. (Fullan, 2004,

p. 53)

In the following discussion, I review the outcomes of the implementation process of OBE

within two case studies occurred in Europe and United States. The first study highlights the

effort of University College Cork (UCC) in Ireland in the integration of OBE in its

organizational structure and the second is a multi-year project involving sixteen diverse

American community colleges that supported the development of practices for assessing and

using student learning outcomes to improve student success. In conclusion, I describe the lessons

learned from these practices to be considered for further development of a leadership model of

OBE implementation in the Canadian context based on Fullan’s reculturing organizational

theory.

The Implementation of OBE Within the European Context

The European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) workshop

(Adamson et al., 2010) on Quality Assurance and Learning Outcomes held in September 2010 in

Vienna, Austria emphasized the important role of the outcomes-based approach to teaching in

higher education and recognized Outcomes Based Learning (OBL) as a formal replacement to

the teaching-centered approach and an intrinsic component of the implementation of the Bologna

Process.

An article of this workshop’s report entitled Which Requirements Should the Formulation

of Learning Outcomes Meet? (Ryan, 2010) focuses on the experience of University College Cork

(UCC) in introducing the outcomes-based learning approach to teaching across the entire

university in a systematic way, and the steps taken to ensure that the introduction was

accompanied with appropriate rigour and standards. “Initially, the university participated in a
 51

EUA Quality Culture III Project on Implementing a Learning Outcomes based approach to

teaching in 2003-2005” (Ryan, p. 23) as a member of a network of six EU universities involved

in this eighteen month project which was later followed by an international conference in 2005.

One of the key objectives of that study was the alignment of the programs with the

National Qualification Framework, which is a key component of institutional reviews in Ireland.

The results of this study laid the groundwork for a plan of action in the implementation of the

outcomes-based approach across all programs at both undergraduate and graduate levels. An

important part of the following activities were seminars held in individual departments and

faculties as well as mentoring of interested staff. The report includes some strategies that

facilitated the successful formulation and implementation of an outcomes-based learning

approach in UCC (Ryan, 2010, pp. 23-25). The publication of a handbook Writing and using

learning Outcomes – a Practical Guide, which was later adopted by the Academic Council of the

university as the rulebook for staff. This guidebook written by Kennedy et al. (2006), included a

clear set of terminology and recommended level of detail required in formal university

publications.

An ongoing support via seminars and workshops provided by the University’s Teaching

and Learning Support Centre accompanied the handbook and introduced interested faculty and

staff to the aspects of the new approach such as assessment methodologies, pedagogies and

assurance of the achievement of the learning outcomes. An OBE format was adopted by the

university that included learning outcomes and assessments for all modules offered,

accompanied by a clear description of the module content and other relevant information. (Ryan,

2010, pp. 23-24)

 52

A subcommittee of the Academic Council was charged by the university to oversee the

process of the implementation of the assigned OBE format in all programs and to ensure the

rigour and the correctness of the procedures. Staff were encouraged to ensure an on-going

reflection and improvement in the module descriptors and teaching practices through a defined

reflective cycle.

Students were also involved in the research and activities leading up to the adoption of this

approach in UCC. Employers and other stakeholders also welcomed this initiative and the

transparency of all aspects of program delivery. The Irish Government under the National

Development Plan and the Higher Education Authority financially supported the publishing and

printing of the guiding Handbook.

My analysis of the systematic process of implementation of OBE at UCC identified both

a top-down and bottom-up approach. The decision-makers encouraged active participation of the

faculty, staff and other key stakeholders in the whole process by holding creative seminars and

interactive workshops in order to enhance the dissemination of knowledge on OBE at all levels.

Another aspect of this successful endeavour was its creative approach to quality

assurance, which was based on reflective practices and improvement rather than measurement.

However, the key strength of this process was its research-based approach. As mentioned in the

guideline (Kennedy et al., 2006) “A key resource to this activity was the expertise developed by

the contributors to the conference in conducting the research prior to the presentation of their

work” (p. 23). Finally, the financial support of the Irish Government played a crucial role in the

dissemination of research and implementation of the new culture within the organizational

structure.

The American Project

 53

The paper entitled Learning Outcomes for the Twenty-first Century: Cultivating Student

Success for College and the Knowledge Economy by Miles and Wilson (2004) provides an

overview of the 21st Century Learning Outcomes Project, a multi-year, multi-phase project that

used a mixed methods research methodology in an effort to document the implementation of

outcomes-based learning within sixteen American community colleges. The main goal of this

project was “to increase the capacity of community colleges to define and document the

acquisition of the critical competencies that students need to succeed in the workplace, in

transfer education, and in today's society” (p. 88).

In this mixed methods research study, the researchers used a pragmatic worldview as an

overarching perspective, which explained the design of both qualitative (focus group and site

visits) and quantitative (surveys) methods. This project was conducted in two stages and

researchers used several methods of inquiry in their study by undertaking transformative mixed

methods procedures. In the first stage of Planning and Research, the researchers studied the

feasibility of their project by undertaking the qualitative method of focus group discussions.

“Preliminary focus groups with college leaders in Phase 1 of the project convinced the funding

agency and project directors that community colleges varied too much in structure, governance,

and culture to expect a single common solution to such a complex endeavour” (Miles & Wilson,

2004, p. 89). The findings collected from stage one of the project set the ground for the second

stage of Implementation and Advocacy.

The Miles and Wilson (2004) study is consistent with McClenney’s (1998) statement

which describes some of the underlying causes of a growing demand and an external pressure for

demonstration of learning outcomes:

 54

The ugly truth about the current situation in American higher education, even in most

community colleges, is that we do not have a clue what and how much students are

learning - that is, whether they know and can do what their degree (or other credential)

implies. (Miles & Wilson, 2004, p. 87)

This statement shows that the authors found no evidence that could define, demonstrate

and measure the quality (what) as well as the quantity (how much) of learning at that time. This

also suggests that the research methodology of using both qualitative and quantitative strategies

may have been the best tool for gathering information in order to respond to the project’s goal

which was “enhancing the capacity of community colleges to define and document students'

acquisition of critical learning outcomes” (Miles & Wilson, p. 88).

In the Miles and Wilson (2004) study, the work of colleges toward the project’s goal

resulted in some unexpected outcomes and achievements, however the important result of this

project was that it recognized a shift in the institutional approach caused by the implementation

of the pre-defined institutional objectives. “Although the project began with the goal of

cultivating a focus on learning outcomes, several college teams quickly found this work to be a

catalyst for major institutional change” (p. 97).

Some of the challenges of undertaking the outcomes-based education approach identified

in the Miles and Wilson (2004) research study are mentioned as a lack of collaboration among

disciplines and other groups within the institution; lack of knowledge about assessment processes

and tools; lack of awareness of the need for outcomes-based education; lack of appropriate,

effective assessment tools and models; a perception that some important learning outcomes are

not measurable; traditional resistance to self-assessment in higher education; lack of incentive for

outcomes-based efforts resulting from past external requirements for accountability, funding, and
 55

policy that are rarely tied to individual student learning; increasing demands and constricting

resources, which leave little time or incentive for educational reform efforts of this magnitude (p.

97).

The analysis of these challenges shows that the lack of awareness about the importance of

outcomes-based education as well as the assessment tools and strategies could be identified as

the root of other challenges such as the lack of collaboration among different groups within the

institution and the perception that some outcomes were not measurable.

However, the issue of assessment in an OBE educational system remained the main

concern among participants in the Miles and Wilson (2004) study. “Throughout the project,

participants universally identified assessment as the most difficult aspect of this work, and during

seminars, focus groups, and site visits they explored the reasons for this determination” (p. 98).

The report of the Miles and Wilson (2004) study concludes by a list of effective

recommendations and states that almost all of the sixteen colleges that joined this research

initiative were still engaged in implementing their learning outcomes agenda more than three

years later and recognizes that

a learning outcomes approach can help a college demonstrate to its students that it offers

them relevant curricula, meaningful information about their learning achievements, and

more control over their learning to help them prepare for success in their professional and

personal lives. (p. 99)

Other institutions embarking on a learning outcomes journey might take the following

lessons from the pioneering experiences of these sixteen forerunners:

learning outcomes implementation must be a continuous campus conversation; the

impetus for adopting an outcomes-based approach should be the institution's stated and
 56

lived value of student learning; faculty should be deeply engaged and supported from the

onset in the leadership of any effort toward outcomes-based learning; the institution

should implement outcomes-based learning using a model that fits its culture and value.

(Miles & Wilson, 2004, pp. 98-99)

In conclusion, the review of the recommendations depicted in the literature suggests the

necessity of establishing an on-going dialogue on OBE within the institution.

Leading in a culture of change means creating a culture (not just a structure) of change.

It does not mean adopting one innovation after another; it means producing the capacity

to seek, critically assess, and selectively incorporate new ideas and practices- all the time,

and inside the organization as well as outside it. (Fullan, 2004, p. 53)

Even when supported by decision-makers and administrators, a shift from teaching-

focused strategies to learning-centered approaches needs willingness and engagement from

faculty who are directly involved in the teaching-learning experience. Fullan’s study on cultural

change confirms a resistance to change due to anxiety and fear of the adaptation to the new

culture. Fullan (2004) states “The implementation dip is a dip in performance and confidence as

one engages in an innovation that requires new skills and new understandings (p. 49).” He

believes that effective leaders are sensitive to the consequences of the implementation process

and respect the resistance within the organization by including differences. Effective leaders not

only encourage like-minded colleagues; they combine affiliative and coaching leadership in

order to build relationships and bring a clear vision that would inspire people to keep going.

“Reculturing involves hard, labour-intensive work. It takes time and it really never ends. This is

why leaders need energy, enthusiasm and hope” (p. 54).

Practice of Action Research in Curriculum Planning

 57

What is action research? Action research is a methodological approach, which aims to generate

knowledge and theory that in turn will inform practice. Derived from social sciences and critical

theory, action research places the practitioner in the heart of the research and believes in the

intellectual power of the practitioner as researcher in the production of theory. The implication

of action research in education has developed new educational research approaches with the

teacher-as-researcher movement as one of its prominent streams (Herr & Anderson, 2005; Holly

et. al, 2009; Joyce & Tutela, 2006; Kemmis, 2006; Kincheloe & McLaren, 1994; Lewin, 1946,

1948; Merriam & Grenier, 2019; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; McKernan, 1996; McNiff, 2014,

2016; McNiff, & Whitehead, 2002, 2011; Whitehead, 1989). This section is a critical overview

of action research in the field of education as my strategy of inquiry. I also discuss the role of

reflective practice as a methodological approach to curriculum planning, which will lead to the

scholarship of teaching and learning.

Action Research: A Critical Framework

Action research is a term that represents a wide range of terminology used in the

articulation of research that has been done either by or in collaboration with practitioners and/or

community members. Herr and Anderson (2005) in their book entitled The Action Research

Dissertation: A Guide for Students and Faculty discuss this popular research approach and

mention the most common terms used in this context “as participatory action research or PAR;

practitioner research; action science; collaborative action research; cooperative enquiry;

educative research; feminist action research, and advocacy activist, or militant research” (p. 2).

The authors argue that action research is the best representative of this methodology for

pragmatic and philosophical reasons.

 58

Pragmatically, it is probably the most generically used term in all disciplines and fields of

study, so it serves as an umbrella term for the others. It also makes action central to the

research enterprise and sets up nicely a tension with traditional research, which tends to

take a more distanced approach to research settings. (Herr & Anderson, 2005, p. 3)

Furthermore, Herr and Anderson (2005) suggest that action research belongs to

prominent communities with a scientific approach and has its roots in a variety of intellectual

traditions that have fundamental differences from the mainstream research traditions in the social

sciences where “positivistic, quantitative methods- what Mills (1959) called abstract empiricism-

emerged as dominant in the social sciences in the US during the mid-twentieth century” (p. 10).

Research communities place emphasis mostly on the works of Kurt Lewin (1946, 1948)

and the group-dynamics movement of the 1940s; the legacy of Paulo Freire and participatory

research of the 1970s; the tradition of organizational development and workplace democracy of

Scandinavian-based researchers and at the same time the theory of action science through the

works of Chris Argyris and Donald Schön in the 1980s and 1990s.

However, action research in education, which constitutes the focus of my study, is

heavily grounded in John Dewey’s (1933) approach to human experience as the generator of

knowledge and Schön’s (1983) concept of the reflective practitioner who has also been

influenced by Dewey’s works. In my review of the literature, I found a disruption on this line of

inquiry during the second half of the 20th century due to the dominance of positivist research

methods that were viewed as more legitimate approaches in natural and social sciences as well as

psychological research.

While Lewin (1946, 1948) was the first researcher who promoted the practice of action

research in the social sciences and argued that knowledge could be produced from problem
 59

solving in real-life situations, Scandinavian researchers who believed in language and

communication, and therefore, dialogue as the basis of democratic organizational development,

grounded their theoretical framework on Habermas’ (1987) theory of communicative action.

This framework created a theoretical basis for a view of planning with an emphasis on:

widespread public participation; sharing information with the public; reaching consensus through

public dialogue rather than exercise of power, and replacing the model of the technical expert

with one of the reflective planner (Bolton, 2005, p. 2).

Reflective Practice as a Methodological Approach

Reflective planners are practitioners who become critically involved with their own

practice in order to improve their work. By taking action, they give meaning to their lives as they

try to live their values in their practice. By generating a living form of theory, they study their

own practice and produce personal theories from within practice. McNiff and Whitehead (2011)

in their book All You Need To Know About Action Research argue that action research proposes a

form of disciplined and systematic research process where researchers are well capable of

creating and developing their own theories by studying their living practice.

The authors state that it exists a general agreement among the action research community

that this type of research is about both action which means taking action to improve practice, and

research as a way of coming up with new understandings which is creating knowledge. But there

is a disagreement about “the balance between taking action and doing research” as many texts

emphasize the need to take action but not to do research, and a second idea which suggests “who

does the action and who does the research, that is, who creates the knowledge” (McNiff &

Whitehead, 2011, pp. 10-11). They believe in the second concept of action research which claims
 60

that while the purpose of all research is to generate new knowledge, the purpose of action

research is “to generate new knowledge, which feeds into new theory” (p. 14).

Action research is appropriate - when the researcher wants to evaluate the consequence of

their doing by examining the way their doing influences their own or other people’s learning.

Some purposes mentioned by McNiff and Whitehead (2011) are: to improve their understanding,

develop their learning and influence others’ learning. In this context, researchers become both

the observers and the subjects of their own observations. Furthermore, the research questions

from other kinds of traditional social sciences methodologies, which evolve around the what and

how others do, change their structure and take the form of How do I …? questions.

While the externalists believe in research as a thing to be implemented and are focused

on what they are doing, the person-centered researcher asks the What am I doing? question. The

first way of inquiry is an abstract propositional form about what is happening for other people

whereas the second concept becomes “an embodied living form about what is happening for me

which has given rise to the term ‘living theory’ as distinct from ordinary ‘theory’ (McNiff &

Whitehead, 2011, p. 12).” The best case scenario in this context is the transformation of practice

into living theories when the individual practitioner asks, “What am I doing? How do I

understand it in order to improve it? How can I draw on ideas in the literature and incorporate

them into my own understanding? How do I transform these ideas into action?” (p. 15).

Although action research has increasingly been workplace-based (Garnett et al., 2009)

and not exclusively higher-education-based, as traditional research tends to be, it has become

very popular in recent decades within post-secondary environments where teachers undertake

action research as a methodology of research either for graduate studies or professional

development. In this context, “professional learning involves critically reflective practice in

 61

which we question our assumptions and personal experiences, and we inquire into the

perspectives of students, colleagues, the social context and the literature” (Holly et al., 2009, p.

9).

Following a cyclical process, the reflective practitioner creates change by understanding

the learning environment. This understanding will come from doing things differently and

observing the consequences. An action-reflection cycle or action plan proposed by McNiff and

Whitehead (2011) includes the following stages: observe, reflect, act, evaluate, modify and move

in new directions. This can be turned into the following questions:

What is my concern? Why am I concerned? How do I show the situation as it is and it

develops? What can I do about it? What will I do about it? How do I test the validity of

my claims to knowledge? How do I check that any conclusions I come to are reasonably

fair and accurate? How do I modify my ideas and practices in light of the evaluation?

(Whitehead, 1989, p. 3)

McNiff and Whitehead (2011) state some people claim that action research is a common-

sense approach to personal and professional life as they are constantly involved in action, and

reflect on the consequence of their doings. So, they ask, What is different? The difference is in

that “action research insists on justifying claims to knowledge by the production of authenticated

evidence, and then making the claims public in order to subject them to critical evaluation in

order to test their validity” (p. 37).

Evaluation itself is a problematic issue as people have different views about the result of

the evaluation. So, the question is, Who evaluates what?

In traditional outsider/spectator approaches, an external researcher makes judgements on

what other people are doing. From a self-study perspective, the researcher evaluates their
 62

own work. If action research is a process in which the ‘I’ studies the ‘I’ in company with

others ‘I’s’, then the evaluation can be seen as the ‘I’ making judgements about what the

‘I’ is doing in relation to others. This calls for considerable honesty, and the capacity to

listen to and act on critical feedback. (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011, p. 38)

One of the main criticisms of action research as a reliable research methodology is the

question of validity. How could action researchers prove they have found out information, which

creates new knowledge? How can they demonstrate they have exercised their influence to

improve learning for improving practice? Or in another word, How to produce evidence of

learning?’

Teacher-researchers often produce evidence of their own learning in many different

forms such as reflecting journals, blogs, portfolios, memos and emails, or artworks and

visual metaphors. In order to prove that other people have been influenced by the action

researcher’s action, the researcher can ask them these questions: Have I influenced you?

How? In this context, the researcher can use the methods of other traditional research

methods such as interview or survey/questionnaires to gather their accounts of what and

how they have learned as the consequence of their actions. (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011,

pp. 66-67)

I believe that action research and reflective practice can be implemented as an

educational research methodology in the realm of curriculum planning.

The curriculum is the vehicle for opening, creating, building, and bringing life to

educational topics and spaces; learning is the process through which the curriculum is

made manifest. Opportunities and tools to learn can shape their - and our- worlds. This is
 63

reason enough for us to develop the tools of scholarship through action research. (Holly

et al., 2009, p. 13)

The scholarship of teaching has been defined as “a process of inquiry and reflection into

teaching in order to achieve new understandings, to raise new questions, and to ultimately

improve teaching and learning” (Driscoll & Wood, 2007, p. 220). What kind of actions can we

carry out in our classrooms with our students? How will we ensure that individual voices are

heard so that the actions we plan help us to realize our aspirations? Holly et al. (2009) in their

book Action Research for Teachers: Traveling the Yellow Brick Road discuss the journey of

action research for critically reflective teachers who embrace this educational research approach

and believe in the scholarship of teaching and learning. A possible design of an action research

study proposed by Holly et al. (2009) suggests the following questions that could inform

curriculum research and planning:

What is my research interest? What will I try out in order to improve my practice? How

will I document the process? How will I verify that judgments are trustworthy, credible,

and respectful? How will I interpret the data? How will I portray what I have learned and

make it public? How these actions make life better? And what will I do next? Who are

my critical colleagues? (pp. 173-174)

My interest in action research as my research methodology is influenced by Habermas’

theory of communicative action that promotes dialogue which is “central to human life and

combines both reflection and action leading to praxis” (Joyce & Tutela, 2006, p. 65) as well as

the concept of reflective practitioner introduced by Schön which in turn is based on Dewey’s

studies of human experience as producer of knowledge.

 64

Based on the action research cycle proposed by McNiff and Whitehead (2011), I

undertook a reflective investigation of the implementation of an outcomes-based education

curriculum in the design program that I taught. I believe that the findings of this study support

me in my current teaching endeavour and help me to play a more effective role in the facilitation

of the transformational process at the both the course level and the institutional level. It also

provides leaders and policy-makers in higher education at different operational levels with a

better understanding of the existing issues regarding the planning of the integration of a learner-

centered approach to design curriculum at program/course levels.

Scope and Limitations of the Literature Review

My analysis of the literature on OBE revealed a global shift from teaching-centered to

learning-centered education which is due to an ever increasing demand for learning

measurement, educational transparency and credit transferability in order to meet the

requirements of today’s market-driven and knowledge-based economy. The scope of this

literature review includes the advantages and disadvantages of this change through the analysis

of scholarly writings and findings that highlight the initiatives undertaken by academics and

governments in Europe, Canada, Australia and the United States.

Despite the new initiatives undertaken by HEQCO and the Council of Ontario

Universities (COU) in the identification of learning outcomes and the importance of OBE as both

a tool for quality assurance and enhancement of the quality of teaching and learning, I found a

lack of evidence on how this tool is being implemented within Ontario’s higher education system

at program/course levels.

Another gap is the lack of data in the literature on the implementation of OBE in the

field of studio-based design education, nationally as well as internationally. Regarding the

 65

growing interest of Ontario’s higher education section in the formulation and integration of OBE

as well as the lack of evidence on the outcomes of this change within design programs, I believe

that my action research study will support the policy makers with a better understanding of the

challenges ahead, most specifically in the field of creative-based programs.

Summary of Chapter Two

The focus of Chapter Two is the evaluation of the change of paradigm from the

teacher/content-centered to learner/learning-centered education that has occurred around the

world from the 20th century. The literature emphasizes the attempts and achievements as well as

barriers and challenges of the implementation of the outcomes-based educational approach,

mostly in Europe and the United States. The leadership of change that emerges based on policy

recommendations from the literature and would facilitate the integration process are also

discussed.

Regarding the importance of OBE in Ontario’s higher education and the changing face of

design and design education around the world, in my review of the literature I found that more

research is needed in order to create a better understanding of the unique aspects of art and

design education, its relationship to the outcomes-based framework implemented in Ontario’s

colleges, and most specifically the best practices of the implementation of OBE at George Brown

College School of Design

In Chapter Three, I explore the practice of critical and reflective teaching within the

realm of action research in curriculum planning at post-secondary level and explain how this

research method contributes to new educational practices. I also discuss the rationale of my

research design, site and participant selection, data collection tools as well as methodological

assumptions based on the purpose of the study and research questions. Ethical issues and
 66

considerations that provide for the protection of the rights of the participants and ethics review

approval procedures from the relevant institutions constitute another section in the following

chapter.
 Chapter Three: Research Design and Methodology

This was a case study that focused on the challenges that I, as the action researcher and

design educator at the post-secondary level faced in the integration of a learning outcomes-based

curriculum model that had been adopted in the past two decades by the higher education sector in

Ontario in order to ensure quality, transparency and compatibility among the credentials. In this

thesis research, I studied the implementation of the outcomes-based education curriculum in one

design program through investigative cycles of action-reflection of my own teaching practice in

the Art and Design Foundation Program at the School of Design, George Brown College. The

selection of action research as my strategy of inquiry is based on my response to the qualitative

and critical nature of challenges that educators are facing as the effects of the integration of a

learning outcomes-based curriculum in their teaching practice (Driscoll & Wood, 2007).

In this chapter, I describe the research design, methodology, instrumentation tools and

data gathering methods and data analysis. I also discuss the validity of the research tools under

the heading Establishing Credibility.

The underlying epistemology and philosophy of the data collecting tools and methods

selected for the purpose of this study were analyzed under Methodological Assumptions. The

limitations of the chosen methodology, the potential influence of myself as the researcher, as

well as the steps that I took in order to decrease the effect of the potential weakness are discussed

under Limitations.

Under the Ethical Issues heading, I discuss how the rights of participants were protected

during and after the study, and I identify the data gathering processes that required REB

approvals from the University of Toronto as well as George Brown College. A Summary of this

chapter concludes the discussion and restates the purpose of the research.

67
 68

Research Questions

The overall research question of this action research study was, How can I, as a design educator,

adapt my teaching praxis within an outcomes-based curriculum to prepare students for the challenges

that new designers are facing, and how can I develop a model of effective OBE in design programs that

may facilitate the transition from teacher-centered to learner-centered education?

The specific research questions that drove this study were:

Research Question #1. How do I develop and implement an outcomes-based course and

curriculum?

Research Question #2. How do I effectively evaluate my teaching praxis?

Research Question #3. How do I contribute to the implementation of outcomes-based education

in the institution?

Research Design

I chose a single case study as my research design. According to Creswell (2009), “case

studies are a strategy of inquiry in which the researcher identifies the essence of human

experience about a phenomenon as described by participants” (p. 13), while Stake (1995)

believes case study research is an exploration of a single or collective case, which aims to

capture the complexity of the object of study and brings together “naturalistic, holistic,

ethnographic, phenomenological, and biographic research methods … within a palette of

methods” (pp. xi–xii). Case study methodology is deeply connected to core values and

intentions, and is “particularistic, descriptive and heuristic” (Merriam, 2009, p. 46).

Yin (2002) defines case as “a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context,

especially when the boundaries between a phenomenon and context are not clear and the

researcher has little control over the phenomenon and context” (p. 13). While Yin’s
 69

epistemological orientation is not explicitly mentioned in his text, Yazan (2015) argues that

Yin’s philosophical concept is leaning towards the positivistic view of case study research.

According to Yin, a case study researcher should “maximize four conditions related to

design quality: construct validity, internal validity, external validity, and reliability. How

investigators deal with these aspects of quality control” (Yin, 2002, p. 19) is an important aspect

of the case study research process. Thus, from Yin’s point of view, “case study is an empirical

inquiry that investigates the case or cases conforming to the above – mentioned definition by

addressing the ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions concerning the phenomenon of interest” (Yazan, 2015,

p. 137).

While Yin does not clearly articulate his philosophical stance about case study, Stake

(1995) is very clear in the articulation of his constructivist view. Stake believes “most

contemporary qualitative researchers hold that knowledge is constructed rather than discovered”

(p. 99), and that “How case study researchers should contribute to reader experience depends on

their notions of knowledge and reality” (p. 100).

From a Stakian viewpoint, constructivism and existentialism (non-determinism) should

be the epistemologies that orient and inform the qualitative case study research… Thus,

he mainly conceives of the qualitative case study researchers as interpreters, and

gatherers of interpretations which require them to report their rendition or construction

of the constructed reality or knowledge that they gather through their investigation. In

Stakian perspective, qualitative researchers should expect another level of reality or

knowledge construction to occur on the side of the readers of their report, in addition to

the above mentioned two levels. (Yazan, 2015, p. 137)

According to Yazan (2015), Merriam’s epistemological view has more similarities to

 70

Stake’s viewpoint than Yin’s. Merriam (1998) asserts “the key philosophical assumption upon

which all types of qualitative research are based is the view that reality is constructed by

individuals interacting with their social worlds” (p. 6) and that “that reality is not an objective

entity; rather, there are multiple interpretations of reality” (Merriam, 1998, p. 22).

Therefore, espousing this philosophical assumption, the primary interest of qualitative

researchers is to understand the meaning or knowledge constructed by people. In other

words, what really intrigues qualitative researchers is the way people make sense of their

world and their experiences in this world. (Yazan, 2015, p. 13)

In terms of the definition of case study, I positioned myself in alignment with Yazan’s

constructivist view of case study (2015) and his belief in “knowledge as being socially constructed

and emerging from peoples’ social practices; therefore, [the concept] of social reality as being

generated and constructed by people and existing largely within people’s minds” (p. 138).

Furthermore, as this was an action-research study focused on my personal experience related to

the phenomenon that was the focus of my study, I adapted Merriam’s (1998) view of the case

study which asserts

The researcher brings a construction of reality to the research situation, which

interacts with other people’s constructions or interpretations of the phenomenon

being studied. The final product of this type of study is yet another interpretation

by the researcher of others’ views filtered through his orher own. (p. 22)

Research Methodology

My research methodology is based on a qualitative approach aligned with the qualitative

nature of my inquiry. As stated by Creswell (2009),

 71

Qualitative research is a means for exploring and understanding the meaning individuals

or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. The process of research involves

emerging questions and procedures, data typically collected in the participant’s setting,

data analysis inductively building from particulars to general themes, and the researcher

making interpretations of the meaning of the data. The final written report has a flexible

structure. (p. 4)

I used action research as my strategy of inquiry as informed by Habermas’ theory of

communicative action (1987), which promotes dialogue and critical inquiry, and the concept of

reflective practitioner introduced by Schön (1983, 1987). Furthermore, it is based on Dewey’s

studies of human experience as producer of knowledge (1910, 1933).

Habermas (1987) introduces the concept of communicative action “in which actors in

society seek to reach common understanding and to coordinate actions by reasoned argument,

consensus, and cooperation rather than strategic action strictly in pursuit of their own goals”

(p.86). The communicative action theory places emphasis on reaching consensus through public

dialogue and replacing the model of the technical expert with one of the reflective planner

through reflective dialogue - what Schön calls reflection-in-action (Bolton, 2005, pp. 2-17).

The critical and emancipatory aspects of action research position the practitioner as both

subject and object of the research, at different moments, “by adopting and alternating between

the contrasting attitudes of practitioner and critical, and self-critical observer of her or his own

practice” (Kemmis, 2006, p.94). The most important aspect of critical action research is to

improve the self-understanding of the practitioner and improve the outcomes of his or her actions

(Reason, 1994, p. 2).

 72

Freire (1970, 1998) emphasizes dialogue as central to human life, an act of creation and a

vehicle for change, which combines both reflection and action leading to praxis. He points out

the important role of conversation as a way of knowing and believes that dialogue “helps humans

understand and investigate the world from their own web of reality while concurrently working

to awaken them as conscious beings” (p. 89).

Freire maintains six central characteristics for emancipatory dialogue:

• Love, a commitment to others;

• Humility, learning and acting together without arrogance;

• Critical faith in man, the ability to reinvent one’s self;

• Hope, for action and change;

• Critical thinking, reality is a transformative process; and

• Trust, a bond. (Freire, 1990, pp. 75-81)

In this research study, my selected strategy of inquiry is an emic (insiders) view where I

take the role of a participant-observer. Therefore, I position myself as an insider who studies her

self-practice and collaborates with other insiders with the ultimate goals of professional

development and empowerment, and a positive contribution to my professional setting.

An action research study of my own teaching that included cycles of planning, acting,

observation of action and critical reflection on the course of actions helped me to question my

own beliefs, values and assumptions with a commitment to seeking out solutions to the recurring

issues of a learning-centered course design and management.

This method of inquiry helped me to share my new knowledge and insights with my

colleagues who are facing the same challenges. It also supported me in the enhancement of the

quality of my teaching practice by finding practical responses to everyday teaching challenges.

 73

Another aspect of this strategy of inquiry was to learn about the beliefs, experiences and points

of view of my colleagues on how to improve our professional praxis through self-evaluation and

a free flow of ideas using the language of design.

By sharing my personal experience and fostering/facilitating a critical dialogue among

faculty, I built an interactive conversation platform between my peers, the institution and myself

with the higher goal of improving the quality of teaching and learning, and the integration of the

OBE curriculum model in the Art and Design Program at George Brown College

I investigated the different aspects of the implementation of outcomes-based education

within two contextual domains: 1) teacher (myself) and students and 2) teacher (myself) and

School of Design. Therefore, I conducted this study in two concurrent phases that were iterative

(repeated cycles) and incremental (smaller portions at a time that built on each other) as follows:

Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self

This phase included the study of the implementation of outcomes-based learning in my

teaching in the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) at the School of Design, George

Brown College which is offered in two semesters. For the purpose of this study, I investigated

the Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice course that I taught in this program during

the Spring/Summer semester 2017. The characteristics of these course is its studio format as

being a representative of the courses that I teach in G108.

My research plan of Phase A was an interpretation of McNiff and Whitehead’s (2011, p.

9) model of action research as the underlying structure of my model and the action-reflection

cycle proposed by Kemmis (Herr & Anderson, 2005, p. 5) as consecutively depicted in Figures 1

and 2.
 74

Figure 1 represents the six steps of action-reflection cycle proposed by McNiff and

Whitehead.

Figure 1

Action-Research Cycle

Move in New
Direction

5. Modify 1. Observe

4. Evaluate 2. Reflect

3. Act

Source: Adaptation of McNiff and Whitehead Cycle by Mousavi Hejazi (2014)

A notional action plan proposed by McNiff and Whitehead (2011) (which is a modified

version of the plan in McNiff and Whitehead) discusses the following actions:

• Take stock of what is going on;

• Identify a concern;

• Think of a possible way forward; try it out;

• Monitor the action by gathering data to show what is happening;

• Evaluate progress by establishing procedures for making judgements about what

is happening;
 75

• Test the validity of claims to knowledge;

• Modify practice in light of the evaluation. (p. 9)

As described by Herr and Anderson (2005) the action-reflection model proposed by

Kemmis constitutes a slightly different spiral of action cycles as follows:

• To develop a plan of action to improve what is already happening;

• To act to implement the plan;

• To observe the effects of action in the context in which it occurs;

• To reflect on these effects as a basis for further planning, subsequent action and

on, through a succession of cycles. (Kemmis, 1982, p. 7)

Figure 2 depicts these visualized adaptations of the stages and actions therein.

Figure 2

Action-Reflection Cycle

•To develop a plan of action to • To act to implement the

improve what is already plan.
happening.

1. Plan 2. Act

4. Reflect 3. Observe

• To reflect on these effects as • To observe the effects of

a basis for further planning, action in the context in
subsequent action and on, which it occurs.
through a succession of cycles.

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi Adapted from Kemmis (2006).

 76

I have created the acronym Pl-Ac-O-Re for the spiral or loop of the Plan-Act-Observe-

Reflect cycle proposed by Kemmis (Figure 3) using the initials of each step. According to the

online Latin dictionary, Pl-Ac-O-Re happens to be a Latin term used in the Middle Ages as

peace and contentment (https://www.online-latin-dictionary.com/), which I hope to bring to my

students and myself by becoming a more effective teacher.

Figure 3

Action-Reflection Loop ‘Pl-Ac-O-Re’

Reflect Plan

Observe Act

Source: Visual Adaptation of Kemmis Action-Reflection Cycle by Mousavi Hejazi (2014).

In Phase A, I integrated the Pl-Ac-O-Re loop into McNiff and Whitehead’s proposed

model as presented in Figure 4. In Phase A, Action includes Planning and Acting on the plan

while Research is the Observation and Reflection on Action. Evaluation will take place as

closing the loop through the view of other observers of the Action.

My proposed action research cycle was implemented and studied within four Units of

Learning (ULs) as following:

1. UL1: Project 1- Colour Wheel and Composition: Reflection of Self

2. UL2: Project 2- Colour Harmony Systems: Variations of One Design

3. UL3: Project 3- Colour & Illusion of Depth

 77

4. UL4: Project 4- Practice of Colour in Art & Design

Figure 4

Mousavi Hejazi Action Research Cycle

Evaluation Action

Research

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2020).

I used the Learning Cycle (LC) practiced at George Brown College to analyze the actions

that I undertook during my case study. LC involves motivation (inspire), comprehension

(inform), practice (coach) and application (mentor) as depicted in Figure 5.

Finally, I studied the constructive alignment of intended learning outcomes (ILOs),

teaching and learning activities (TLAs), and assessment tools (ATs) as proposed by Biggs and

Tang (2007) and depicted in Figure 6 for each of the four units of learning mentioned above.

Figure 6 shows the visualized version of Biggs and Tang’s constructive alignment model.
 78

Figure 5

The Learning Cycle

Source: George Brown College Teaching & Learning Handbook, retrieved 2014, p. 8.

Figure 6

Constructive Alignment proposed by Biggs and Tang (2007)

Intended Teaching and

Learning Learning Assessment
Outcomes Activities Tools (ATs)
(ILOs) (TLAs)

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2014). Visual Adaptation from Biggs and Tang.

Phase B – Critical Dialogue with Institution

In Phase B, I created a critical conversation between the different stakeholders who were

involved in the implementation of the learning outcomes-based curriculum model at the

program/institutional levels. The objective of this initiative was to understand the structure and

the dynamic of the implementation process of outcomes-base education that informed my

curriculum development practice as the Academic Coordinator of G108 as well as my action

 79

research study.

In several one-on-one and all faculty meetings, I shared my research goals with my

colleagues and peers in order to encourage them to share their own teaching practice and the

challenges that they were facing in adjusting their practice to the requirements of the learning

outcomes-based teaching model developed by the College. I created an interactive physical

platform to discuss the challenges as well as the best practices of the learning-centered approach

to teaching and learning in the Art and Design Foundation Program at the School of Design. In

this way, I came up with a working understanding of teaching in the context of OBE from the

view of my colleagues that informed my actions in curriculum development and improvement

during my case study.

Therefore, the purpose of my study in Phase B was to create a critical dialogue with my

peers and the decision-makers at different levels of the institution. Finally, I was able to

contribute in a positive way to the collective effort of the School of Design in providing students

with competencies that will support them in their future educational pathways and career goals,

and as well in becoming responsible citizens of the world.

In Phase B, first I explained the actions that I have taken as an Academic Coordinator in

initiating and working in collaboration with my colleagues at the School of Design on learning-

centered curriculum planning and development prior and throughout my study. Then, I explored

outcomes-based and learning-centered actions of other educators in my setting through the

analysis of the collected data by creating critical dialogue with my peers. The analysis of the

curriculum supported me in the development of a new curricular proposal with an outcomes-

based approach. Finally, I explained what I learned through my action research process in order

to improve my practice and to make a difference in my working environment.

 80

As depicted in Figure 7, Phase B that constitutes the Critical Dialogue with the Institution

was informed by my findings in Phase A, which was a Critical Dialogue with Self.

Figure 7

Concurrent Phase A and Phase B of Action-Reflection Cycle

Move in New Move in

Direction New
Direction

5. Modify 1. Observe 5. Modify 1. Observe

Phase A Phase B
Critical Critical
Dialogue Dialogue
with Self with
Institution
4. Evaluate 2. Reflect 4. Evaluate 2. Reflect

3. Act
(Cycles of 3. Act
Pl-Ac-O-Re)

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2014).

Site and Participation Selection

The site of both Phase A and Phase B of this study was the School of Design at George

Brown College. I received administrative consent to conduct my case study and name the study

site George Brown College (see “Administrative Consent” in Appendix A).

Phase A is a case study of my own teaching practice of the Foundation Design II: Colour

Theory and Practice course that I taught in the Art and Design Foundation Program during the

Spring/Summer semester 2017.

The two other participants of my study in Phase A were an Interested Observer and a

Critical Expert. I asked one of the recent graduates, who previously participated in my course to

join two sessions of my class during my study as an Interested Observer (see “Informed Consent
 81

– Interested Observer” in Appendix C). The Interested Observer attended two sessions of the

three hour class and consented to be named in my dissertation. In the first sessions, I asked the

Interested Observer to observe the dynamic of the class and take notes. She then shared her

hand-written notes with me. In the second session of class, I provided the Interested Observer

with a hard copy of a questionnaire (see “Questionnaire for Interested Observer” in Appendix

Ci). She took notes in class under each question and then sent a typed, clean copy of her answers

to me by email.

The Critical Expert in my study is a professor of the Teaching and Learning Exchange

(TLX) at the College. We first met to talk about the action-research study of my teaching in the

Art and Design Foundation Program and discussed some of the findings that had emerged from

my research. I also shared the hard copy of the course outline of ART1021 for their feedback and

took notes during the meeting. I then invited my critical friend to participate in one of my

teaching sessions of ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space during the Fall semester

2019 to observe my teaching in the classroom. I received their written feedback in another

meeting and discussed their opinion on the improvement of my teaching.

In Phase B, I created a conversation with my colleagues and decision-makers at the

institutional levels about the implementation of outcomes-based education at George Brown

College. The participants of Phase B were my colleagues who were teaching at the College, and

willing to share their experience and ideas about the different steps of the implementation

process within our institution. For this purpose, I built an effective collaboration with different

divisions of the college and most specifically the Office of Academic Excellence in developing

critical conversations across the College.

Data Collection and Recording

 82

In order to answer my research questions, I collected and recorded multiple forms of data

concurrently within different stages of both Phase A and Phase B of my study using

observations, questionnaires, interviews, documents and audio-visual materials as my qualitative

tools of inquiry with the written consent of the participants of my study.

Phase A - Critical Dialogue with Self

Qualitative data were collected and recorded in each stage of the two integrated action-

reflection phases of Phase A (Phase A.1 and Phase A.2) of this study which aimed to create a

Critical Dialogue with Self. As depicted in Figure 4 (see p. 77), the proposed action-reflection

cycle in Phase A included six stages: 1. Observe, 2. Reflect, 3. Act (cycles of Pl-Ac-O-Re), 4.

Evaluate, 5. Modify, and 6. Move in New Direction. I collected field notes and audio-recorded

data using specific qualitative methods in each stage of the action-reflection cycle of my inquiry.

It is important to note that the occurrence of the six stages happened concurrently or

consecutively within the context, the situation and the event but the collection of the data were

approached within the following structure:

Stage 1: Observation. I observed the participants (my students) from a complete

participant view (myself as the teacher) who was participating in the action and at the same time

studying the participants in their natural setting (the classroom). This was an unstructured

observation of the behaviour researched as it happened within the natural setting of the

classroom and involved description as well as interpretation of the activities and the event from

the insider (emic) view with a learning-centered pedagogical view.

The focus of my observations was to understand the effectiveness of the constructive

alignment of intended learning outcomes (ILOs), teaching/learning activities (TLAs) and

assignment tasks (ATs) within Phase A.1/UL1, Phase A.2/UL2, Phase A.3/UL3 and A.4/UL4.
 83

In this stage, I collected narrative data through hand-written field notes taken during the

session and as well after my observation, and organized my notes in the form of observational-

descriptive notes (ON), conceptual notes (CN) and procedural notes (PN). Field notes are

recognized by qualitative and ethnographic researchers (Willems & Raush, 1969, p. 3) as one of

the most utilised research tools by non-anthropologists in the investigation of phenomena and as

well as in making more informed observations in relation to their natural setting (McKernan,

1996, p. 93). Despite their subjectivity, the benefit of field notes in my study was that they

provided me with a flexible structure which in turn guided me in recording the occurring action

as it happened.

While observational notes described the event and focused on the action through direct

listening and watching of the participants dynamic in the setting, conceptual notes constituted my

personal statements on the importance and significance of the observed facts which helped me to

construct meaning from observation. Procedural notes or aide-mémoires describe procedures,

methods and operations that form the decision-tactical considerations. Finally, analytic memos

were used to summarize my stacks of field notes, systematize my thoughts on the observational

stage of my action-reflection cycle of each unit of learning and remind me of the themes and

issues that should be examined through the next cycle.

Stage 2: Reflection. In this stage, I reflected on my teaching practice by answering three

critical questions (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011) that structured my reflection process, What did I

do? What did I learn? and What is the significance of my action and my learning? Therefore, I

kept a reflective journal to record my reflection on the actions that I undertook within each unit

of learning, my learning from my actions and how my learning informs and influences my

actions after each session of my class.

 84

Critical reflection is the backbone of reflective practice. Brookfield argues

reflection becomes critical when it has two distinctive purposes. The first is to understand

how considerations of power undergird, frame, and distort educational processes and

interactions. The second is to question assumptions and practices that seem to make our

teaching lives easier but actually work against our best long-term interests. (Brookfield,

1995, p. 8)

My action research approach focused on the second purpose of the critical reflection

process mentioned above which intends to not only uncover and question the underlying

assumptions that guided my practice but also helped me to think about how to improve my

practice. Explicit reflection on action created a structure where I was able to stand outside of

myself and view my actions from a new perspective.

According to Brookfield (1995), awareness about the implicit assumptions that lead our

actions can become very challenging as our assumptions make us who we are and how we act.

Brookfield distinguishes between three categories of assumptions: paradigmatic, prescriptive and

causal.

While paradigmatic assumptions are the basic structuring axioms we use to order the

world into fundamental categories and prescriptive assumptions are assumptions about

what we think ought to be happening in a particular situation, causal assumptions help us

understand how different parts of the world work and the conditions under which

processes can be changed” (pp. 2-3).

In the reflective stage of my inquiry, I explored the critical impact of causal assumptions

in the beginning of my reflective practice, as they are more attainable and easiest to identify. I

was aware that it was a harder task to uncover the paradigmatic and prescriptive assumptions of
 85

my teaching practice, as they are deeply ingrained in my beliefs, the way I see the world around

me and construct the reality that nurtures my actions. I am confident that the structured

investigation of my reflective process provided me with the necessary tools to overcome the

challenging task of looking deeper into the fundamental beliefs that influence my practice.

I was able to show that my practice was not a mere sequence of actions but it was

purposeful and informed by personal as well as social values. Therefore, I critiqued my

assumptions based on the values that inspire my decisions and my commitment to my practice.

To answer the What did I do? question, I reflected on the different types of assumptions that

informed my actions. I reflected about What did I learn? in terms of which of my assumptions

should be revisited and/or changed. Finally, I came up with new ideas in taking actions that

would be a better reflection of my values and would answer the critical question of What is the

significance of my action and learning?

Stage 3: Act. The action phase of my action-reflection study constituted the heart of my

action research study. The stage of Plan-Action-Observe-Reflect or Pl-Ac-O-Re was studied

within each of the four units of Foundation Design II: Colour Theory & Practice. I used the Pl-

Ac-O-Re loop in order to analyse my practice of the Learning Cycle (see Figure 5, p. 78), which

includes motivation, comprehension, practice and application, and should serve the overall goal

of the Constructive Alignment of ILOs, TLAs and ATs within each of the four above-mentioned

units of learning (UL1, UL2, UL3 and UL4).

In the Plan phase, I organized the lesson plan for each of my sessions based on the

intended learning outcomes that should be achieved at the end of the unit. I collected qualitative

documents that had informed my planning process such as the documents from the Office of

Academic Excellence, teaching documents, students projects, the written documents on the ideas
 86

that I exchanged with experts on the skills of designers and design managers (emails, face-to-

face) and internal communications such as emails and documents posted on Blackboard which is

the Learning Management System at the College.

I gathered my Action data by keeping teaching logs and documenting my teaching

activities over the fourteen sessions of my study before the occurrence of the session. I organized

my logs in chart summary format by developing a list of my teaching activities during the three

hours of each class session.

In the Observe stage, anecdotal records were used to record factual descriptions of the

incidents that occurred in the lives of my students in the classroom while working individually or

in interaction with each other, and what I observed during the teaching and learning activities of

each session. McKernan (1996) states that “Anecdotal records are narrative-verbatim

descriptions of meaningful incidents and events which have been observed in the behavioural

setting where the action takes place” (p.67).

The written narratives were a short depiction of the behaviours and conversations that I

heard and saw happening between my students in relationship to the occurring activities, which

gave me an insider perspective of my students’ behaviour and possible attitude over the period of

this study. I organized each entry of my record in two parts: the first part was an objective

account of the observed incident, while the second part was my interpretation of the event.

This method was selective, as I, the researcher, was the one who decided which incident

was meaningful in the further planning of my teaching and therefore should be documented and

reflected upon. Anecdotal records of the Pl-Ac-O-Re loop were analysed later by cross –

referencing to the field notes that I collected at the Observe stage of my action-reflection cycle of

the unit of learning.

 87

Photography was another observational tool that I used in gathering qualitative data on

the behaviour of my students during the Observe stage of my study. Research-produced

photographs (McKernan, 1996, p. 101) of the setting of my inquiry supplemented my other data

collection techniques such as the anecdotal records of the observed behaviour and the diaries that

I collected during the reflection phase. The consent form the participants signed (see “Informed

Consent – Student Participants” in Appendix B) included consent to photograph their activities

and include them in the reporting of my findings.

Some limitations to the use of photographs as research tools may lie in their analytic and

interpretive function, and the objectivity of the interpretation of their meanings. Bogdan and

Biklen (1982) argue that the complete photographing of a classroom can count as a cultural

inventory; while Berger believes that “the photograph is a memento from a life being lived”

(Berger, 1980, pp. 51-52).

Cross-referenced with my other data collection tools, photographs of my consenting

students engaged within the teaching and learning activities provided me with invaluable visual

information of the lived experience and enriched the quality of my research narrative.

Reflect is the final phase of the Pl-Ac-O-Re stage of my action-reflection cycle of each

unit of learning. In this phase, I kept a diary to reflect on my own actions, and the interactions

that occurred between my students as well as the students and me during the four steps of the

Learning Cycle of each session. In my diary, I daily recorded my thoughts on the important

events of the session, what I had experienced during the event, what I learned from my

experience, how I accomplished the tasks, how successful I had been in the achievement of my

teaching plan, how my students approached the activities, how successful (or not) they were in
 88

their approach, and finally, what I should do next and how I should do it in order to improve the

quality of the teaching and learning experience.

Stage 4, Stage 5, Stage 6: Evaluate, Modify, and Move in New Direction. Evaluation,

Modification and Moving in New Direction of my teaching practice based on the principles of

outcomes-based education constituted the fourth, fifth and sixth stages of my study. I believe that

evaluation and modification work hand in hand as the reason why we evaluate our practice is to

modify the way we do things and start a new set of actions based on our new understanding of

our practice. McNiff and Whitehead (2011) argue that

in new scholarships, which aim for creativity and transformation, being open to further

testing, critique and modification based on reflection, evaluation and feedback is a sign of

strength and shows that we are open to learn from our own as well as other people’s

ideas. (pp. 79-86)

Evaluation is not a neutral process but it is based on the values that inform people’s

approach to evaluation. Therefore, I evaluated my practice from three different lenses: my own,

my students and my critical friends. In this way, I was able to see and understand my practice

from a variety of viewpoints with different values and standards, which helped me to develop a

better understanding of the actions that I should take in order to improve my teaching.

In Stage 4, I used the Ideology Critique process as the critical tool for my self–evaluation.

Ideology critique is a term associated with thinkers from the Frankfurt School of critical

social theory, such as Habermas (1987), Adorno (1973), Horkheimer (1974), Marcuse

(1964), and Fromm (1941). The purpose of the process is to help us recognize how unjust

dominant ideologies, uncritically accepted, are embedded in everyday situations and

practices. Dominant ideologies are sets of values, beliefs, myths, explanations, and
 89

justifications that appear to the majority to be self-evidently true and morally desirable.

(Brookfield, 1995, p. 87)

In my ideology critique activity, I chose the critical incidents in my practice that typify

the way I normally teach and examined them from the dominant view to find out what had been

omitted from the view and to imagine an alternative process that was more inclusive and

rationale.

To understand my students’ perspective of my practice in Stage 5, I used a Critical

Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) (see “Critical Incident Questionnaire Form” in the Appendix Bi) at

the end of Unit of Learning 2 to learn about the happenings that my students had found as being

significant in their learning during that unit and the effects that my actions or theirs had on their

learning. “Critical incidents are vivid happenings that for some reason people remember being

significant” (Tripp, 1993; Woods, 1993).

Brookfield (1995) defines CIQ as a “quick and revealing way to ascertain the effects

[teacher’s] actions are having on students and to discover the emotional highs and lows of their

learning” (p. 114). Knowing the points of view of my students on the concrete events that were

significant to their learning was an invaluable way to test my understanding of the particular

incidents and see if the meanings and significance that I placed on my actions are aligned with

the ones that students take from them.

Finally, I asked one of my former students who had graduated from the G108 program to

participate and observe the class dynamic as an Interested Observer, complete a questionnaire

and give me their opinion on the teaching and learning events that they found significant in the

improvement of my teaching practice.

 90

In Stage 5, my critical friend was a Critical Expert from the Teaching and Learning

Exchange at George Brown College. I provided them beforehand with my teaching documents

and met them to discuss my teaching and assessment methods in the alignment of ILOs, TLAs

and ATs. During an informal meeting, I took written notes with their consent. The advantage of

taking note was the fact that we were able to have an open dialogue that I was able to

reconstruct later using my notes as the total account of our discussion.

The final stage of my action-reflection cycle was to Move in a New Direction. In this

phase, which is Stage 6 of my inquiry, I organized the collected data in the form of a Teaching

Portfolio.

My Teaching Portfolio was an autobiographical and self-evaluation account of what I did

based on my past experience, why I did it and what I hoped to achieve. It contained the evidence

of my action, my reflection on my actions, what I had learned from this process based on the

values that had inspired my work and how I hoped to realize those values in my teaching.

I kept my Teaching Portfolio as a living document that presents my best thinking on my

practice and will be open to further testing, critique and modification. This document presents

the final outcome of Phase A – Critical Dialogue With Self of my study. Figure 8 depicts the

data collection tools for each stage of the action-reflection cycle.

 91

Figure 8

Data collection Tools for Phase A-Critical Dialogue With Self

6. Move in New
Direction
(Teaching
Portfolio)

5. Modify (Critical 1. Observe (Field

Expert) Notes)

4. Evaluate 2. Reflect
(Ideology Critique, (Reflective
CIQ, Interested Journal)
Observer)
3. Act/PlAcORe
(Documents,
Teaching Log,
Anecdotal Records,
Photography, Diary)

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2014).

Phase B: Critical Dialogue with the Institution

In the Critical Dialogue with the Institution phase, I developed a shared framework for

thinking about the formulation and implementation of outcomes-based education in the Art and

Design Foundation Program at the School of Design. Creating an informal conversation with my

peers and articulating my action-reflection process of implementing the principles of OBE in my

practice helped me to understand the challenges that we are facing in the implementation of OBE

through dialogue and by developing a critical community of practice and as well as to encourage

my colleagues to share their lived experience and contrasting traditions of practice.

Therefore, I created a reflection group of interested practitioners for a collective

exploration of praxis as informed, committed action. “Practice is a social process involving ideas

about what makes for the good” (Smith, 1995, p. 17). I created a flexible framework of inquiry
 92

by facilitating the group exploration of practice through listening, observation and asking

questions. Being aware of and using the language of community supported me in developing a

bank of knowledge that can later be translated into the practitioner’s repertoire of best practices

at the School of Design.

In Phase B, I gathered qualitative data through the reflection-action cycle as depicted in

Figure 9. I used field notes in order to record my observations of the informal conversation

within the reflection group. My reflection on the event, what I had learned from my interactions

and how I had influenced the community were kept in my learning journal.

I recorded the process as well as the actions that I undertook in approaching my peers and

decision-makers at different levels of the institution in a personal action log. These actions

ranged from informal conversations with peers to group discussions or interviews. I audio

recorded the Reflection Group working session (see “Guide for Reflection Group Discussion” in

Appendix F ii) to be reconstructed for further analysis. In order to make decisions about my

actions and the decision-making process, I used documents such as the pedagogical documents

from the Office of Academic Excellence, emails and any relevant written documents.

I evaluated my actions through self-critique as well as peer feedback. I used the Ideology

Critique tool to challenge my values and points of value in sharing my practice with my

colleagues and the community of practice, as well as my approach in influencing other

practitioners and being influenced by them. Figure 9 depicts the Data Collection Tools for Phase

B – Critical Dialogue with the Institution.

 93

Figure 9

Data Collection Tools for Phase B-Critical Dialogue with the Institution

6. Move in New
Direction
(Practitioner
Toolkit’)
5. Modify
(Critical 1. Observe
Administrator) (Field Notes)

4. Evaluate
(Ideology 2. Reflect
Critique, Peer (Learning
Feedback Journal)
Questionnaire)
3. Act (Personal
Action Log,
Informal
conversation with
Reflection Group)

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2014)

Table 2 depicts the research questions and the research tools that I have used to answer

those questions.
 94

Table 2

Data Sources to Answer the Research Questions

Research Questions Source(s) of Data

1. How do I develop and implement an • Documents (teaching documents, Office of

outcomes-based course and Academic Excellence documents, student
curriculum? on-line survey)
1. • Image-based materials (websites,
photographic images/videos)
• Ideas exchanged with experts on design
competencies (emails, face-to-face, notes)
2. • Observational and narrative field notes
• Analytic memos
• Anecdotal records
• Teaching logs
• Diaries/Reflective journal
• Teaching Portfolio
• Documents (course outline, project sheets,
in-class activities worksheets, students’
artefacts and presentations, course pack,
student’s feedback)
• Students projects/artefacts
3. 2. How do I effectively evaluate my • Documents (personal communications:
teaching praxis? emails/face-to-face)
• Ideology critique
• Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ)
• Critical conversation with critical friend
(audiotaped)
• Photographs/videos
4. 3. How do I contribute to the • Documents (quality assurance documents,
implementation of outcomes-based personal communications: emails/face-to-
education in the institution? face)
• Personal action log
• Learning journal
• Ideology Critique
• Interview/ Questionnaire
• Informal interview/conversation
• Photographs
• Practitioner Toolkit
 95

Data Analysis

Action research is an iterative process where different steps of data generation and data

analysis occur simultaneously. Therefore, the various stages of data analysis involved an

iterative, cyclical approach based on a continual reflection about the data and happened

concurrently with data gathering, interpretation making and reporting writing activities.

In order to generate evidence, I analysed the qualitative data gathered through several

phases of the action-reflection cycles within the following systematic steps of data processing,

data mapping and interpretation:

Step 1: Data Processing and Organization (Reading, Selection and Sorting)

From the beginning of my research, I selected and sorted the collected data into specific

categories. First, I organized and prepared the raw data for analysis by typing out my field notes

and diary entries, and arranging the data into different categories. Then, I created two folders

called data that show my learning and data that show other people’s learning with more refined

categories depending on the sources of information.

As my research progressed, the number of the categories increased along with the

increasing depth of analysis. I examined the data regularly and sorted them into new categories

and files, and created an organized data archive in both digital and physical formats.

Step 2 - Data Coding and Categorization

Before starting to bring meaning to collected information, I read and categorized the

written texts and pictures into specific segments based on their underlying meanings, and labeled

them with terms that I later abbreviated as codes. Then, I clustered together similar topics with

similar codes under specific categories and performed a preliminary analysis. The types of codes

that I considered to develop in my qualitative database, as proposed by Bogdan and Biklen

 96

(1992) and mentioned by Creswell (2009, p.18) were: setting and context codes, perspectives

held by subjects, subjects’ ways of thinking about people and objects, process codes, activity

codes, strategy codes, and relationship and social structure codes.

I developed codes that emerged during data analysis on the main topics of my research

based on the literature review, the theoretical approaches in my research and/or in answering my

research questions. At the same time, I stayed open to new and unanticipated codes or

uncommon codes that were of conceptual interest and supported me in finding new patterns of

meaning in my analysis. Figure 10 depicts the organization of data into categories.

 97

Figure 10

Organization of data into categories

Data

Data that show Data that show

other people's my learning
learning (Phase A)
(Phase B)

Personal Action Teaching Logs Field Notes

Field Notes
Logs

Diairies/Reflect
Learning Conversation ive Journal
Conversation Journal Entries

Written Ideology Written Ideology

Communication Critique Communication Critique

Documents Interview Documents Questionnaire

'Practitioner Teaching
Toolkit' Portfolio

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2014)

Step 3- Data Interpretation and Model-Building (discovery of patterns, generation of meaning

and theorization)

In this step, I first used the coding process in order to connect the underlying information

and generate a detailed depiction of the setting and the people involved in my action research

study. Then, I generated a small number of categories around the main themes that presented
 98

the major findings of my study. Regarding the narrative aspect of action research study, I

interconnected themes into story lines, in both Phase A – Critical Dialogue With Self and Phase

B – Critical Dialogue with Institution. Subthemes, quotations, specific illustrations, visuals,

figures and tables support the narrative depiction of the main themes in Chapter four, Chapter

five and Chapter six. According to McKernan (1996), interpretation of data consists of moving

beyond a mere description of events in an attempt to create meaning and suggest relationships

among data through narration and statement making with the goal of theorization and model-

building.

Based on my educational aims, values and understanding developed from my own

personal professional experience, the interpretation of data were mapped by looking at

What I have learned? from the study of my own practice through different lenses and in

interaction with the institution as well as How I have influenced other people? by sharing my

lived-experience and taking informed actions to bring positive change to practice. I also

developed meaning through a comparison of my findings with the information that I had

gathered from the literature review on critical theories, best practice in the fields of OBE and

design education.

As a practitioner-researcher, the ultimate goal of my study was to improve my practice

and as well theorize and disseminate the process of improving my teaching practice in order to

create a platform of ongoing discourse and dialogue on the implementation of OBE within our

institution.

Establishing Credibility

At this stage, I established the credibility of my claim to knowledge by testing the

validity and reliability of the findings undertaken in my study. According to Gibbs (2007)
 99

“Qualitative validity means that the researcher checks for the accuracy of the findings by

employing certain procedures, while qualitative reliability indicates that the researcher’s

approach is consistent across different researchers and different projects” (Creswell, 2009, p.

190).

By using special pieces of data in relation to my research as supporting evidence of my

findings, I used qualitative validity strategies such as triangulation, spending prolonged time in

the field, using a critical friend and rich description to explain my findings and determine

whether they were authentic, trustworthy and accurate.

I demonstrated the authenticity of my data by showing that my data, used as evidence,

originated from at least three different sources. I validated my research findings through a

triangulation of collected data and established my themes based on several data sources or

participants’ points of view.

My role as the teacher allowed my prolonged presence and participation in the classroom,

which was the selected site of my study for Phase A. I had been a member of the School of

Design since 2008, which gave me an in-depth understanding of the institution and its inside

dynamics as my site of study for Phase B. My past role as the Acting Chair of Design (June-

December 2015) and my current academic position as the Academic Coordinator of the Art and

Design Foundation Program provided me with the opportunity of transparent and meaningful

discussions with my colleagues. My close connection with the study site community also created

the potential for bias in my own interactions and analysis of the information I recorded.

However, in action-research the researcher’s own perceptions are an integral part of the process.

During my study, I asked a critical friend from The Teaching and Learning Exchange at

George Brown College to review my qualitative study and provide me with feedback to add
 100

validity for my account. In this critical conversation with my colleague, I clearly explained why I

was conducting the research study, what I was doing and what I hoped to achieve. I kept a

written record of the meeting as evidence to show the integrity of the procedural aspect of my

research.

I documented the different steps of my research process and checked my transcripts to

make sure that they were complete and displayed as thorough, and accurate account of the

events. I also made sure that my coding process was consistent throughout data analysis by

writing memos about my codes and their definitions. By using these procedures, I checked for

the consistency of my research process and findings, and enhanced the credibility of my

qualitative study.

Methodological Assumptions

Methodological assumptions in qualitative research are the underlying philosophy and

assumptions made by the researcher in regard to the tools and methods used in the process of

qualitative research (Creswell, 2009). According to McNiff and Whitehead (2011), the main

methodological assumptions in an action research study include the following: “Action research

is done by practitioners who regard themselves as agents. The methodology is open-ended and

developmental. The aim of the research is to improve learning with social intent (p. 34).”

McNiff and Whitehead (2011) claim that action researchers take an active part within

their public life and act as agents of change who aim to improve their own experience as well as

others by asking questions but not always accepting final answers or self-righteous justifications.

This means that action researchers take actions while considering what influence they are

exercising in improving their own and other people’s learning. Action researchers raise questions
 101

on two interrelated process: they investigate the social setting for an in-depth understanding of

the order of things in relationship with both themselves and others actors of the setting.

In this context, the iterative and cyclical approach of action research methods makes them

different from the traditional qualitative research process where the researcher expects to find

certain answers. In action research, the process itself becomes the methodology where each stage

leads to another. Therefore, the practitioner-researcher commits to the risk of creating a new

future by staying open to new possibilities while trying new ways of thinking and doing.

Unlike the traditional research methods that displays a cause and effect relationship,

action researchers anticipate new problematic and believe in people’s agency and their capability

in internalizing policies and procedures. In the case of my research, I, as a practitioner of the

outcomes-based learning approach, was myself part of the problem explored. By going through

the cyclical action-reflection research method, I gained a better understanding of the problem

while dealing with the unknown future. I believed that my actions would improve my practice

and create a better future for myself as well as other practitioners who are experiencing the same

challenges in the implementation of OBE in the site of study.

Therefore, the action researcher needs to have a different mental set from the traditional

researcher who works within an environment where the knowledge is given and the research

process is a top-down approach. In this sense, the action research process is similar to the design

process where design is a bottom-up activity and designers start from re-thinking the problem by

finding solutions.

Being trained as a designer where I have learned to deal with the unknown and ill-defined

problems and “to have the self-confidence to define, redefine and change the problem-as-given

in the light of the solution that emerges from [our] minds (Cross, 2007, p. 24), I have learned to
 102

take risks, to be flexible and open-minded, take actions, analyze and evaluate my actions, and

change my direction for optimum results when needed. Therefore, I, as the action researcher, was

able to let my own story evolve by staying open to new possibilities and aiming for new

beginnings.

Another underlying assumption is that the methodology of action-research is valid as it

enhances both self-reflexivity and critical subjectivity. Herr and Anderson (2005) state that “As

researchers we acknowledge that we all enter research with a perspective drawn from our own

unique experiences and so we articulate to the best of our ability these perspectives or biases and

build critical reflexivity into the research process” (p. 60).

By critical subjectivity, Reason (1994) means that action researchers who are positioned

as an insider to the setting and have a long-time experience of working in the site should

acknowledge that their knowledge is based on their primary subjective experience and articulate

their acceptance of their position and awareness of their perspective in their communication.

Therefore, as an insider to the setting of my research, I acknowledged and examined my

evolving perspectives on my practice through my reflective journals and field notes, and as well

through my critical friends’ thoughts and points of view on my practice. Using such qualitative

methods as triangulation of data and consultation with critical friends helped me to challenge my

assumptions and provided me with alternative points of view which supported me in the

validation of my research findings.

Limitations of the Methodology

The major limitation of this study is that the findings are not generalizable to other

settings as it is a single case study of only one researcher (me) and one design course and

program in one college. However, as stated by Creswell (2009) generalization is not the purpose
 103

of case study. “In fact, the value of qualitative research lies in the particular description and

themes developed in context of a specific site. Particularity rather than generalizability is the

hallmark of qualitative research” (p. 193).

Another aspect of this study is its action-oriented methodology that makes it different

from the way that generalizability has been defined within traditional methods of inquiry.

According to Stake’s (1986) concept of naturalistic generalization, and Lincoln and Guba’s

(1985) notion of transferability, in an action-oriented study, findings are not generalizable but

rather transferable from a sending context to a receiving context. Therefore, the responsibility of

the original inquirer is only to provide sufficient descriptive data in order to support the second

investigator in making similarity judgements and applications in their setting of inquiry.

According to Stake’s (1986) evolutionary view of change, “action is influenced by

internal conviction, which comes from voluntarism and personal understanding (…) by both

formalistic and naturalistic generalization, the latter being the result of direct and vicarious

experience” (Herr & Anderson, 2005, p. 62). Skate’s approach to the naturalistic generalizability

of practitioner’s narratives suggests that an action research study on practice can influence the

understanding of other practitioners in similar settings by dialogue and reflection, and drawn

upon the knowledge, which is occurred through real and vicarious experience.

In this context, I have provided a thorough and clear depiction of the setting, my

interaction with my setting and my understanding of my own practice throughout my study in

order to create a naturalistic sense of my lived-experience so that the readers become simulated

to recognize similarities with their own situations and think in a new way about the old

problems.
 104

Other limitations of the action research methodology lie on its ontological and

epistemological assumptions. While ontology is defined by McNiff and Whitehead (2011) as

“the study of being, and is strongly linked with values” (p. 27), epistemology is defined as how

we “understand knowledge, and how we come up to acquire and create knowledge” (p. 27).

One ontological assumption is that action researchers perceive themselves in relation

with others and undertake enquiries with others, recognizing that people are always in

company (…) The core idea of transformational capacity enables [them] to incorporate

the insights of others and transform them as [they] create [their] living theories of

practice. (p. 29)

In this context, action researchers intend to create a research environment based on

mutual respect and creative engagement where the differences of opinion are understood as a

dynamic contribution to the improvement of knowledge and practice.

The task for action researchers is especially demanding when the other does not agree to

share the same ethic, which means that they have to find ways of living in the direction of

their values within a context of being with others who do not share the same

underpinning ethic of empathy and a willingness to develop understanding relationships.

(McNiff & Whitehead, 2011, p. 30)

I agree with Herr and Anderson (2005) that “most lasting change takes place through

internal conviction or ownership” (p. 62), so I identified and approached like-minded colleagues

who were willing to participate in my study and believed in the improvement of their own

practice through dialogue and reflection.

Finally, the most important epistemological assumption of action research that I have to

acknowledge is that action researchers judge their work in terms of “whether they can show how
 105

they are living in the direction of their educational and social values, using those values as their

living standards of judgement” (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011, p. 32).

I did not seek a fixed outcome or just one answer to my study but rather believed that

any answer was open to modifications, as I was not working in isolation but in a social setting

where humans are unpredictable and make their own unique choices. Therefore, the aim of my

study was to produce my personal theory that demonstrated my learning and to invite others to

learn with me by sharing my experience and encouraging them to share their own experience

with the common goal of collaborative generation of best practices in our institution.

Ethical Issues and Considerations

According to Creswell (2009), ethical issues are one of the most important aspects of any

research as “research does involve collecting data from people, about people” (p. 87). In order to

protect their research participants and the integrity of their research, researchers are required to

comply with ethics regulations of their institutions or any other institutions that may be involved

in the research process. In the case of my research, I received the approval of the Research Ethics

Boards (REB) of both the University of Toronto and George Brown College. I received

Administrative Consent to conduct my study at George Brown College and the permission to

name the School of Design at George Brown College in my dissertation. The Administrative

Consent form is attached as Appendix A.

As defined in the data collection and analysis sections of the current chapter, I

conducted an action research study of my praxis as it is related to the improvement of my own

practice as well as in interaction with my peers within two concurrent and correlated phases

called Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self and Phase B – Critical Dialogue with the Institution.
 106

In the following section, I will explain how I took into account the ethical issues of the different

steps of my inquiry in each phase of my study.

The purpose of my study was to collect data about my own lived experience in the role of

a participant-observant and in relationship with my students who are the main participants of my

study.

Action research involves practitioners studying their own professional practice and

framing their own questions. Their research has the immediate goal to assess, develop or

improve their practice. Such research activities belong to the daily process of good

teaching, to what has been called the ‘zone of accepted practice’. The concept of a zone

of accepted practice is often used to determine whether research is exempt from formal

review. (Zeni, 1998, p.13)

According to Zeni (1998), many of the ethical issues of traditional methods of qualitative

inquiry “may not address the ethical issues that arise when practitioners study their own

contexts” (p. 9). The question is, What is the line between teaching (practice) and research? In

action research, although we are documenting our own practice, we are not acting in isolation as

we are working with our students and our colleagues. “Action research tends to involve: 1) more

systematic documentation and data gathering; 2) more self-reflection in writing and 3) a wider

audience (collaboration, presentation, publication)” (Zeni, 1998, pp. 10-11).

The questions on ethical issues in action research such as responsibility and ownership

arise when dealing with the dissemination of knowledge to a wider public. In the case of design

education, students’ projects and final presentations are some of the main evidence of the

teaching-learning activities. In this case, I asked for individual consent from my students and

named them and their works in my study.

 107

One issue was that in some cases the participants might want to disclose their identity in

order to retain ownership of their ideas. In my case, I informed the participants about the possible

consequences of non-confidentiality and if they wished to be named. One student out of 18 did

not sign the consent form.

Furthermore, I ensured the confidentiality of my research throughout my study by

excluding the name of the participant who did not choose to be named from any documents or

documents used in my records. As the only purpose of my study was the improvement of my

own practice, the reporting of the collected data only includes the names of the participants and

the artworks of the students who gave their consent to be named in my research. As stated by

Zeni (1998), alternative to pseudonyms are composite rather than individual portraits of the

participants and interchanging physical and other descriptions (Holly et al, 2009, p. 171). “In

most cases, if the study includes teaching activities and curriculum that are part of the regular

teaching process, withdrawing is not an issue” (Holly et al, 2009, p. 171). For example, if all

students are participating in small group works on a design project, they may not withdraw from

the study but they opt to not participate in a survey about their group work. All of the students

who completed the Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) survey in the classroom had consented

to participate and to be named in my study.

I took pictures of my students while they were engaged in group work in the classroom. I

was conscious to not include the only student who did not complete the consent form or just take

the picture in a way to not include that student. Otherwise, all the other students who consented

to participate in my study had given a written consent to be photographed.

Other participants of the Phase A of my study were the Interested Observer and the

Critical Expert that I invited as non-participant observers to my class and later interviewed for
 108

the evaluation and modification of my teaching practice. In this case, I asked them for their

written consent in compliance with the University of Toronto and George Brown College’s REB

applications (see “Informed Consent for Critical Expert” in Appendix D), I informed them about

the confidentiality of their information as well as their right to not respond or withdraw in any

stage of the study without explanation or penalty.

In Phase B, which is the Critical Dialogue With the Institution, all the information

regarding the participants in the interview and survey were kept confidential. The participation to

interviews and surveys were on a volunteer basis for all the participants in both phases of my

study. The permission of the participants acquired before the interview and the survey (see

“Informed Consent Reflection Group Meeting – Faculty” in Appendix F). I asked the

participants to sign the consent to have the interview audio-recorded. I initially had planned to

interview three faculty members but was able to interview six faculty who were teaching in the

Art and Design Foundation Program at the time of my study (2017-2019).

There were no known or anticipated risks associated with participation in this study.

In order to ensure the integrity of my research, I built relationships of trust by open

communication and reciprocity, and provided them with an accurate account of the information,

which may acquire debriefing between the participants and myself. I will keep all the data in a

secure box at home and accessible only to my thesis supervisor and myself for a period of five

years.

Summary of Chapter Three

In this chapter I discussed the research plan of my study, which includes my research

methodology, the selection of the case study site and participants, data collection and recording

tools and methods, and the data analysis process. I also described the tools and instruments that I
 109

used to establish the credibility and validity of my findings. I then described the methodological

assumptions of my study, which constitute the philosophy underlying the methods of my inquiry

as well as the limitations of my study in terms of ontological and epistemological assumptions.

Finally, I described how I dealt with the ethical issues relevant to my study such as the protection

of the rights of the participants and the confidentiality of their information. I present the findings

in Phase A in Chapter Four and findings in Phase B in Chapter Five. Chapter Six presents the

conclusions of my action research, the implications of my study for praxis and implications for

further research.
 Chapter Four: Findings and Analysis in Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self

In this case study, I explored the challenges that I, as an educator at the postsecondary

level faced in the integration of an outcomes-based curriculum model in my teaching practice. In

my role as a part-time faculty and an Academic Coordinator at George Brown College (GBC)

School of Design (SoD), I studied the development and implementation of an outcomes-based

course and curriculum in the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108). While the main

purpose of my action research study was to improve the quality of my teaching practice, I also

sought to develop a flexible platform that would support the ongoing and constructive dialogue

about curriculum development and teaching in the Art and Design Foundation Program as well

as George Brown College. The platform I proposed is based on the principles of outcomes-based

education using emerging action research tools modeled in this study.

My study took place in two phases. In this chapter I describe the in-depth process and

outcomes of Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self. These outcomes address Research Question

#1, which asked, How do I develop and implement an outcomes-based course and curriculum?

and Research Question #2, which asked, How do I effectively evaluate my teaching praxis?

In Chapter Five I describe the process and outcomes of Phase B – Critical Dialogue

with the Institution which addresses Research Question #3, which asked, How do I contribute to

the implementation of outcomes-based education in the institution?

Phase A: Method/ Scope/ Context/ Participants

In Phase A, I critically analyzed my teaching practice using action research as my method

of inquiry. According to McNiff (2016), action research comprises of two words: action and

research which refer to two different concepts: while action is about what we do in our context,

110
 111

research is about how we find out about what we do and how we can find ways to do it better (p.

12).

For the purpose of this study, I chose the ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory

and Practice course that I taught during the Spring/ Summer semester 2017 as a sample course

for my research. This program in which this course resides is a one-year certificate program

which introduces students to a broad range of analog and digital tools and techniques, and helps

them to explore their educational and future career interests in the field of art and design (see

“G108 Course List and Prerequisites” in Appendix G ).

ART1021 is a second semester three credit course, which is offered twice during the

academic year: once in the Winter and again during the Spring/ Summer semester. While the Fall

(September-December) and the Winter (January-April) semester courses are offered within 15

weeks (with week eight as the intersession week) and three hours per week, the Spring/ Summer

semester is divided to two periods of seven weeks with the first period offered from May to June,

and the second from July to August. In this way, each course is offered twice per week for a total

of 42 hours (7 weeks X 6 hours). I usually teach ART1021 during the period of July-August in

the Summer semester.

Although, the report of my findings mainly discusses the study of my teaching in the

above-mentioned course as a sample course, I have also analyzed relevant data from three

similar courses that I teach in the program. These courses are:

• ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space which is a core course offered in the

first semester and is a prerequisite for Foundation Design II and Design Process. I teach

this course in the Fall (September-December) and in the Winter (January-April).

 112

• DESN1020 Design Process which is a mandatory course offered in the second semester. I

teach this course during the Winter and the Spring (May-June) semesters.

• ART1036 Art and Design Portfolio Showcase which is also a mandatory course offered

in the second semester. I teach this course in the Winter and Spring/ Summer semesters.

In addition to myself as the teacher-practitioner, the participants of my study in Phase A

were 17 of my students in Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice, one interested

observer (graduate of the program) and one critical expert (Professor, Teaching and learning

Exchange at GBC). All of the 17 students who agreed to participate in my research consented to

be observed and photographed in the classroom, to complete the hard copy of the Critical

Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) survey, to be identified by name and given credit for any in-class

activities or projects that they submit. The interested observer who is a graduate of the program

also consented to be named in the report of my findings. The critical expert consented to be

audio-recorded during our interview discussion.

In the next section, I explain the structure of the integrated Action Research Model that I

designed based on my insights and finding as the result of this phase of my action research study.

Action Research Model for Phase A

Figure 1 (see p. 74) depicts the three stages of the action research cycle I undertook in

Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self. In this model which has emerged from my study, I

considered both Kemmis (2006), and McNiff and Whitehead (2011) action-research models

previously described in my methodology in Chapter Three.

In the model proposed by McNiff and Whitehead (2011), the action-reflection cycle has a

sequential order where each of its six stages take place one after the other, while in my new
 113

integrated model, Action becomes the centre of the Research activities, occurs in a flexible and

creative process, and is cyclical and iterative.

As described by Herr and Anderson (2005), Kemmis’s action-reflection cycle that I have

integrated in my proposed action research model, constitutes a following spiral of action cycles

as shown in Figure 2 (see p.75).

• Plan (Pl): Plan the action;

• Act (Ac): Act to implement the plan;

• Observe (O): Observe the effects of action in the context in which it occurs;

• Reflect (Re): Reflect on these effects for further planning and subsequent action.

In my proposed model depicted in Figure 1 (see p. 74), Action constitutes the heart of the

study while Research and Evaluation take place in conjunction with Action. The final stage

which closes the loop of the Action Research Cycle is Moving in New Direction which itself is

the start of a new cycle for Action.

In this new model, Action itself is a step-by-step process of iterative sequences of Plan-

Act, while Observation-Reflection constitute the Research phase of my study and takes place

simultaneously throughout the Action process and in interaction with the cycles that constitute

the main Action. Observation and Reflection occur first while involved in-action and then again

on-action. Then, I evaluated my Action in order to modify my practice in the light of evaluation.

I used three lenses in the Evaluation phase: my own, the Interested Observer who is my

former student and a graduate of the program as well as the Critical Expert who is a Professor at

the College’s Teaching and Learning Exchange. Finally, I developed a new plan to improve my

practice by moving to a new direction.

 114

In Phase A.1- Action, I explain the actions that I took in the planning and teaching of

ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice in the Spring/ Summer semester

2017. While Phase A.2- Research depicts what I learned about my teaching through my own

observation of and reflection on my teaching in ART1021, Phase A.3- Evaluation is the analysis

of the findings collected from critical observers who participated in my study as well as my

students. The Summary of Chapter Four is the summary of findings and the highlights of key

actions that I plan to take to improve my teaching practice.

Phase A.1- Action

In Phase A.1 of my action research, I explain the Actions (Plan/Act) that I took

throughout the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, p. 78) of my teaching with an emphasis on the Actions

that I took in four Units of Learning (UL) of ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory

and Practice that I taught in the Summer semester 2017 as my case study. The case study took

place in 14 sessions for a total of 42 hours (7 sessions X 6 hours). Each UL includes the

components of each of the four projects that I planned in Foundation Design II: Colour Theory

and Practice.

The actions that I took in each Unit of Learning are in accordance with the published

GBC stages of the Learning Cycle (LC) as shown in Figure 5 (see p.78).

1. Motivation: Inspire.

2. Comprehension: Inform.

3. Practice: Coach.

4. Application: Mentor.

The study of the actions that I took throughout the Learning Cycle were based on Biggs

and Tang’s (2007) proposed Constructive Alignment of the Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs),
 115

Teaching & Learning Activities (TLAs) and Assessment Tools (ATs) within each of the four

Units of Learning (UL1, UL2, UL3 and UL4) in ART1021- Summer 2017.

Phase A.1.1- Plan

In the Planning phase, I explained my decisions and my thinking in planning the courses

that I taught in the Art and Design Foundation Program with an emphasis on ART1021-

Foundation Design II as my case study. This was achieved through the analysis of the teaching

documents (handouts, digital documents, student sample works), college’s documents and online

platform.

This phase was divided in two interconnected main sections: The first section is Planning

the Structure which included my review and organization of the Course Outline and the Units of

Learning. In the second section, I described the planning of the Human Interaction within The

Learning Cycle which took place during the Teaching and Learning Sessions and as well the

Digital Interaction within the Blackboard platform under Planning the Learning Environment.

Planning the Course Structure. This task is the first responsibility of faculty in

planning their course. In this section, I first explain the different components of a course outline

at George Brown College and particularly, the changes that I have made in the course outline of

ART1021 using an outcomes-based approach based on my findings in this case study. I then

review my planning of the teaching and learning sessions throughout the semester while

reflecting on the principles of constructive alignment in organizing the Units of Learning within

the sessions.

Course Outline. I believe that the course outline is the most important document of a

course that I have to plan. It provides the timeline and the teaching-learning structure for the

course, and is considered as a contract between the institution and the students. In GBC, each
 116

course is offered in multiple sections throughout an academic year and the preferred practice is

to use the same course outline among all sections for the purpose of consistency. The course

leader who is often a full-time faculty or the academic coordinator is tasked to review and update

the course outline before the start of the semester.

I was assigned to teach ART1021 for the first time in the academic year 2012-2013. At

that time, the name of this course was Foundation Colour and I was in my fourth year teaching at

the College. I was not yet the course leader so I adapted my weekly teaching plan to the course

outline provided to me by the academic coordinator of the program. My confidence in accepting

to teach the Foundation Colour course was based on my previous international experience in

teaching the foundation of colour at the university level in the Industrial Design program (in Iran

since 1991). As this is a foundation course the main content offered in the course outline was

familiar to me. Although at this time, I had to teach the foundation of colour to a different group

of students in terms of the program and its outcomes.

Later, in the academic year 2016-2017, I became the Academic Coordinator of the Art

and Design Foundation Program and thus, the course lead in several courses that I was teaching

at the School of Design since 2008, including ART1021. This gave me the opportunity to review

the course outline both as an individual course as well as in relationship with other relevant

courses in the program. This initiative was a part of my effort to review the Art and Design

Foundation Program based on my research on the emerging required competencies in the field of

art and design. My review of the curriculum in collaboration with my colleagues at the School of

Design is discussed in Chapter Five.

The different sections of the course outline and the changes that I initiated in the course

outline of ART1021 in the Spring/ Summer 2017 (see “ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour
 117

Theory and Practice Course Outline- S2017” in Appendix G iii) in comparison with the course

outline of ART1021 that I taught from 2012 to 2015 (see “ART1021 Foundation Colour- W2015

Course Outline” in Appendix G ii) as the first steps in reviewing and planning the course plan

are as following:

Cover Page. The first page of the course outline contains the pertinent information about

the course including Course Name, Course Code, Credit Hours, Prerequisites and Corequisites,

PLAR Eligibility, Effective Date, Professor (s)’ Name (s) and their email address. Faculty

provide students with their college email address. Students are also introduced to the Equity

policies and Student Responsibilities at George Brown College. Here are the modifications that I

made in this part based on what I learned in the literature review section of my study on setting

the stage for effective teaching (Biggs & Tang, 2007):

• Name change: I proposed the change of the name for the course from Foundation Colour

to Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice.

• Addition of prerequisite: One of the reasons for name change was the connection of its

content to the ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space course offered in the first

semester which I added as the prerequisite to this course. In my experience, students who

had completed ART1020 had a much more successful experience in ART1021 as they

were able to purposefully use their knowledge of the elements of art and principles of

design learned in the first semester in developing good composition in this second

semester course.

Course Description. This part is a summary of the course with an emphasis on what

students learn and/ or do. It is important that students learn about the knowledge, skills and

attitudes that they will acquire in the course from the beginning (Lennon, 2010). I think this is an
 118

effective motivator for a good start of the course for my students. This is the course description

for ART1021:

Students are introduced to the basic fundamentals of colour. Concepts and theories

including visual creativity and process are explored. Students produce practical hands-on

projects using a variety of ideas and approaches that incorporate colour. Past success in

this course has been correlated with attendance and active participation. (see “ART1021

Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice Course Outline- S2017” in Appendix

G iii)

Essential Employability Skills (EES). According to the definition mentioned in all the

course outlines, the role of the EES is defined as following:

As mandated by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities essential

employability skills (EES) will be addressed throughout all programs of study. Students

will have the opportunity to learn (L) specific skills, to practice (P) these skills, and/or

be evaluated (E) on the EES outcomes in a variety of courses. The EES include

communication, numeracy, critical thinking & problem solving, information

management, interpersonal and personal skills. (see “ART1021 Foundation Design II:

Colour Theory and Practice Course Outline- S2017” in Appendix G iii)

Faculty indicates which of the EES are either Learned (L), Practiced (P) or Evaluated (E).

The preferred practice at the college is to choose three EES to be practiced and evaluated

throughout a course. I believe that EES are the soft skills that my students have to learn

throughout the semester and are not stressed enough in the course outcomes so I have them

embedded to be practiced and evaluated as part of in-class activities and assignments.

 119

The updated course outline (see “ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and

Practice Course Outline- S2017” in Appendix G iii) demonstrates the EES that I selected to be

evaluated in ART1021 in comparison to the previous course outline (see “ART1021 Foundation

Colour Course Outline- W2015” in Appendix G ii). The comparison reflects my pedagogical

approach in integrating research activities into the course to enhance the learning of research

skills which will result in the evaluation of the sixth EES “Analyze, evaluate, and apply relevant

information from a variety of sources.” This EES was mentioned just to be practiced in the

previous course plan without evaluation.

Another change that I made was to remove the EES: execute mathematical operations

accurately. This decision was based on a substantial pedagogical difference of approach in

teaching foundation of colour from the traditional approach that I observed as practiced based on

the previous course plan. In the traditional approach, students were tasked to use proportion and

mathematical means to measure and mix their colours, while I believe in Itten’s (1970) colour

theory that emphasizes the perceptual approach where my students are encouraged to train their

eye in seeing and developing pure and saturated colours.

The remaining EES that were removed are:

• Use a variety of thinking skills to anticipate and solve problems.

• Manage the use of time and other resources to complete projects.

I integrated the evaluation of these EESs as a part of assignments and in-class activities

assessments.

Course Outcomes. Course learning outcomes are the cornerstone of a course and play a

critical role in creating the backbone of a constructive alignment structure between intended

learning outcomes, learning activities and assessment strategies within outcomes-based course
 120

planning. Course outcomes are built from the program learning outcomes and constantly

reviewed by the faculty when planning the course as well as during the annual curriculum

reviews by the institution. Here are the course outcomes of the Foundation Design II: Colour

Theory and Practice as mentioned in the revised course outline (see “ART1021 Foundation

Design II: Colour Theory and Practice Course Outline- S2017” in Appendix G iii):

Upon successful completion of this course the students will have reliably demonstrated

the ability to:

1. Apply visual communications and colour theories to the execution of projects.

2. Describe the effects of colour as it applies to visual images.

3. Prepare images that incorporate concepts of colour theories.

4. Execute a project from initial steps through to final completion according to

specifications.

5. Write rationales to justify use of colour in projects and present to class.

6. Research colour theory and practice in the work of artists and designers.

I added the last course outcome by mapping the learning outcomes against the updated

program learning outcomes and as well in alignment with a new research-based project that I

developed for this course.

Delivery Methods/ Learning Activities. I reviewed the delivery methods and learning

activities based on the sixth learning outcome and its ensuing group research assignment, and

made the following changes as depicted in Table 3 (see p. 125):

• For the delivery methods, I added Blackboard, the Learning Management System at

George Brown College (LMS) that I have been using in my courses to increase

accessibility,
 121

• For the learning activities: I replaced quizzes by a bundle of different activities including

library workshop, group presentations, group work, peer feedback and self-evaluation.

List of Textbooks and Teaching Aids. The resources that were needed in the course

including textbooks, magazines, websites and other materials including the art materials are

described in this section. The only change that I made here in my course in comparison to the

previous course outline was to remove the textbook from Required and moved it under

Recommended/Optional. The main reason for this decision is that I create content using different

resources for the information that I intend to provide to students during the lecture or I develop

relevant handouts and recommend the relevant resources for further reading (Biggs & Tang,

2007).

Testing Policy. I removed test and quiz from my course plan so instead of “Tests that are

not completed on the date scheduled will receive a mark of zero unless the student can provide a

documented reason for absence” as the statement under testing policy (see “ART1021

Foundation Colour Course Outline- W2015” in Appendix G ii), I stated “There are no tests in

this course” as I have replaced them with a research assignment in the updated course outline.

Assignment Policy. The assignment policy has emerged from a consensus at the School

of Design which requires that students submit all projects to pass a course. In addition,

Semester marks are based on the evaluation of projects. Obtaining missed assignments

and/or projects is the student’s responsibility. In-class assignments must be completed

within the assigned class time to receive marks. No late submissions are accepted without

prior consent of the Professor. Late project submissions are subject to a late penalty of

10% (i.e. if you received a B, it will become a C). Projects submitted later than 5 school
 122

days without prior permission from the Professor. (see “ART1021 Foundation Design II:

Colour Theory and Practice Course Outline- S2017” in Appendix G iii)

This assignment policies should be the same in all course outlines at the School of

Design, so I did not make any changes in this part.

Evaluation System. This section includes Assessment Tool, Description, Outcomes

Assessed, EES Assessed, Date and (%) of Final Grade.

While I kept the three art-based assignments from the previous course outline, I decided

to replace quizzes with a group research assignment. I think that taking test and quiz is not an

effective way of evaluating the theoretical knowledge of the students (Biggs & Tang, 2007;

Weimer, 2013). Instead, I strongly believe that in design education students should be trained to

apply the terminology, ideas and concepts learned in the classroom by researching the

application of those concepts in the work of artists and designers. (Findeli, 2001)

In my opinion, testing the mere memorisation of the fundamental theories of art and

design is not a constructive evaluation of the student learning within a studio-based environment.

Another aspect of the new assignment is its final deliverable that is planned as a group

presentation. Although students are encouraged to work together, give each other constructive

feedback and critique each other’s works, this new group assignment provided my students with

the opportunity of working together in a topic that all were passionate about (Watson &

Reigeluth, 2008).

I also added a new individual research assignment attached to the research group

presentation. I think that although the final work is evaluated in group, students need to conduct

their own individual research as a separate but connected assignment. In this way, students can
 123

enjoy their individual learning and then share it with their peers with the ultimate goal of group

success (Kalaitzidis et al., 2017).

Finally, I reviewed the grade breakdown and integrated the in-class activities - that were

being evaluated separately- into the grade of the main assignments, while creating a better

balance between assignments’ grades in terms of their components (Goff. et al., 2015).

Topical Outline. The Topical Outline is the session-by-session plan of a course and is

organized based on the Session (Week for the Fall and Winter semesters, Day for the Spring/

Summer semester), Topic/ Task, Outcomes, Content/Activities and Resources (see “Course

Outline Sample” in Appendix Gi).

I reviewed the Topical Outline and planned the sessions based on four Units of Learning.

Each of the three Units of Learning that addressed the three art-based projects (from project brief

to final submission including their attached activities) were spread within four sessions while the

group research assignment activities and group discussions were simultaneously integrated along

seven sessions (Biggs & Tang, 2007; Watson & Reigeluth, 2008).

Units of Learning (ULs). I structure a UL in regard to the components of an assignment

based on the principles of constructive alignment of intended learning outcomes studied in my

literature review, teaching and learning activities, and assessment tools that should be considered

in the completion of that assignment (Biggs & Tang, 2007).

I developed project worksheets, rubrics and supporting documents for each assignment

(see “Teaching Documents” in the Appendix G iv). In addition to the title/ name, the objective

and the description of the project, the project worksheet included the step-by-step process that

should be followed, the materials that could be used and the timetable of deliverables for an

effective time management of the project and as well in alignment with the weekly/ daily plans
 124

laid down in the course outline. I also stated the final mark of the project so that students become

aware of the grade weight for the project. The rubric which displayed the grade breakdown was

developed based on the different parts of the project and their importance in terms of student

learning and design process from research and conceptualization to final production and

presentation of the art/ design work.

Table 3 displays a comparison of the assignments between ART1021-W2015 (the

original course outline) and ART1021- S2017 (the course outline that I reviewed to teach in the

Summer 2017 based on my insights gained in this research study). The major change that I made

in this course was the replacement of the quiz and individual writing research with a research

assignment that was to be completed and presented in group while students were also tasked to

complete an individual research worksheet to demonstrate their own contribution to the group

research. I kept the art-based projects as previously planned in the original course outline with

some minor changes. In addition, I considered in-class activities and one-on-one consultation and

formative feedback for each UL during the class time.

The Units of Learning (UL) that I planned in ART1021 are as following:

1. UL1: Project 1-Colour Wheel & Composition: Reflection of Self

2. UL2: Project 2- Colour Harmony Systems: Variations of One Design

3. UL3: Project 3- Colour & Illusion of Depth

4. UL4: Project 4- Practice of Colour in Art & Design

 125

Table 3

Comparative Table for Assessment Tools (ATs), Descriptions and Grade Breakdown in

ART1021- Winter 2015 and ART1021- Summer 2017

Course ART1021- W2015 ART1021- S2017

Initial Course Outline Changes Made by the Researcher
Assignment/Activity Grade Assignment/Activity Grade
Project 1 25% Project 1 25%
12 Hue Colour Colour Wheel & Composition
Wheel/Illustration12 (Reflection of Self)
(Individual)
Project 2 25% Project 2 25%
Colour Harmony Systems – Colour Harmony Systems
Variations Of One Design (Variations of One Design)
ATs (Individual)
Project 3 Project 3
Illustration Creating 25% Colour & Illusion of Depth 25%
Depth Illusion, Using (Individual)
Blended Colours And
Palettes
In-Class Project 4 15%
Weekly Exercises & Project 15% Practice of Colour in Art &
Reviews Design (Group)
Quiz 10% Library Workshop Activity 5%
(Individual)
In-class Work 5%
Individual class work-in-
progress and one-on-one
consultation on Projects.
AT: Assessment Tools.

UL1/ Project 1: Colour Wheel and Composition (Reflection of Self). This is the first

project of the semester that includes two parts: Phase 1 in which students develop a 12 hue

colour wheel by mixing three primary colours to create secondary and tertiary colours, and Phase

2 in which students design a composition that represents their inner self using only the 12 hues of

the colour wheel. Developing the 12 hues of the colour wheel studied by Johannes Itten (1973)

using gouache paint is the very first step of understanding the foundation of colour and it is the

essential part of all foundation courses in art and design schools around the world.
 126

In the first part of the project (Figure 11), students learn to understand the principles of

colour from an art perspective and by mixing the paint, to train their eye to see the pure colours

that are the foundations of colours in art and design. I changed the second part of the project

from the original course plan in terms of the final deliverable.

Figure 11

Project 1/ Phase 1- Colour Wheel by Yanjun Liu

Source: Student Sample Submitted in the Classroom

Instead of 12 illustrations, I tasked students to use the principles of composition and the

12 hues of the colour wheel to come up with one abstract composition that reflects their inner-

self (Figure 12). Students develop concepts by sketching and drawing throughout the creative

process to produce the final artwork. I also asked them to write a one-page rationale to explain

their understanding of the project, their own process in creating the work of art and finally,

reflect on what they have learned and how they can improve their work (see “Guideline Draft

Rationale” in Appendix G v).

 127

Figure 12

Project 1/ Phase 2 - Composition (Reflection of Self) by Joanna Martinez

Source: Student Sample Submitted in the Classroom

The following outcomes were assessed in Project 1:

1. Apply visual communications and colour theories to the execution of projects.

2. Prepare images that incorporate concepts of colour theories.

3. Execute a project from initial steps through to final completion according to

specifications.

5. Write rationales to justify use of colour in projects and present to class.

I planned the rubric of Project 1 (total grade of 25%) based on the following grade

breakdown (see “Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv):

• Project 1/ Phase 1 (8%): Colour wheel design (2%), understanding of the colours

of the colour wheel (6%),

• Project 1/ Phase 2 (17%): Colour, composition and meaning (9%), process work

(2%), craftsmanship (2%), presentation (2%) and rationale (2%).

UL2/ Project 2: Colour Harmony Systems (Variations of One Design). In the second

project, students were assigned to choose one image and experience Itten’s theory of colour
 128

contrasts by developing six coloured variations of the selected image using gouache paint (see

Figure 13).

Figure 13

Project 2: Six Colour Contrast Variations by Nisha Srivastava

Source: Student Sample Submitted in the Classroom

The creative process included experimentation with the colour contrasts in grid formats

using colour pencils (see Figure 14).

Figure 14

Project 2/ Creative Process- Grids by Nisha Srivastava

Source: Student Sample Submitted in the Classroom

The following outcomes are assessed in Project 2:

 129

1. Apply visual communications and colour theories to the execution of projects.

2. Describe the effects of colour as it applies to visual images.

3. Prepare images that incorporate concepts of colour theories.

4. Execute a project from initial steps through to final completion according to

specifications.

I planned the rubric of Project 2 (total of 25%) based on the following grade breakdown

(see “Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv):

• Project 2/ Creative process (3%),

• Project 2/ Six variations: (3% per colour contrast for six variations),

craftsmanship (2%), presentation (2%).

UL3/ Project 3: Colour & Illusion of Depth. In this project, students were assigned to

explore Itten’s colour contrasts with an emphasis on light-dark contrast to create the illusion of

depth in a composition. In addition to the grey scale, they had to create the light-dark contrast

chart for at least three colours that they are thinking to use in their final composition. The final

work was completed using paint, mixed-media or digital media and could be either realistic or

abstract (Figure 15). Students were also required to write a one-page rationale to explain their

process, their final work and their experience in the completion of the project.
 130

Figure 15

Project 3: Illusion of Depth by Ashley Brisebois

Source: Student Sample Submitted in the Classroom

The following outcomes are assessed in Project 3:

1. Apply visual communications and colour theories to the execution of projects.

2. Describe the effects of colour as it applies to visual images.

3. Prepare images that incorporate concepts of colour theories.

4. Execute a project from initial steps through to final completion according to

specifications.

5. Write rationales to justify use of colour in projects and present to class.

I planned the rubric of Project 3 (total of 25%) based on the following grade breakdown

(see “Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv):

• Project 3/ Light-dark contrast chart (8%)

• Project 3/ Composition: Illusion of depth (9%), process work (3%), presentation

(3%) and rationale (2%).

UL4/ Project 4: Practice of Colour in Art & Design. I designed this project as a group

assignment. In groups of 2-3, students were tasked to research and present the use of colour in

different art and design practices such as environmental arts (architecture, landscape design,
 131

interior design, product design), studio arts (painting, sculpture, ceramics, glass, photography,

fiber arts), fashion (clothing, jewelry) and commercial arts (graphic design) through the works of

artists, designers and/or movements of art.

Students could choose artworks/ designs produced by an individual artist/ designer or a

group of artists/ designers who are recognized as a movement or school of art in a specific field

of practice; research their historical era and its psychological and cultural influences; the

physical characteristics of artworks or designs such as their medium, the material and the

technique used in the production of the works as well as their aesthetic characteristics such as

composition or form and content with an emphasis on the use of colours and their emotional and/

or symbolic meaning.

To support my students in their research, I planned a workshop session in the library with

the School of Design’s Liaison Librarian. I designed a Library Worksheet to evaluate the

individual contribution of each student as a part of the Unit of Learning for Project 4 (see

“Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv). Finally, students were tasked to present their research

in a digital format while each member of the group was assigned to speak to five slides during

the presentation.

The following outcomes are assessed in Project 4:

2. Describe the effects of colour as it applies to visual images.

6. Research colour theory and practice in the work of artists and designers

I planned the rubric of Project 4 (total of 15%) based on the following grade breakdown

(see “Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv):

• Project 4/ Quality of content on the practice of colour in art and design (5%)
 132

• Project 4/ Quality of research including the collected data, analysis and references

(5%)

• Project 4/ Presentation of the research based on the organization of the material,

visual aids, body language & pitch (5%)

I also considered a grade of 5% for the individual Library worksheet.

Planning the Learning Environment

This section provides an overview of my approach in planning my teaching and learning

sessions within the physical and the digital environment where I interacted with my students and

where the students interacted with one another as well. I first planned the Human Interaction in

the physical environment within the four phases of motivation, comprehension, practice and

application of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, p. 78) for teaching/ learning sessions that are

organized throughout the semester in three formats: Lecture and Studio, Studio/ Working Class

and Studio/ Submission, Presentation and Critique.

The Digital Interaction was then structured on the Blackboard Learn platform which is

the Learning Management System (LMS) at George Brown College (GBC). According to the

GBC Website (2021) “Faculty can use Blackboard to post course outlines, communicate with

students, post and receive assignments, quizzes, grades as well as many other interactive online

features” (https://www.georgebrown.ca/faculty/blackboard-essentials).

The courses that I teach at the School of Design take place in a studio lab environment

which includes working spaces as well as computer stations as shown in Figure 16 and Figure

17.
 133

Figure 16

Studio Lab: Physical Environment- School of Design, Summer 2017

Figure 17

Studio Lab: Computer Station- School of Design

Human Interaction: Teaching and Learning. Planning the human interaction within

the teaching-learning sessions is a crucial part of any course development activity which is to

schedule the actions that should be taken by the teacher throughout the semester to ensure the

completion of the course in an effective, feasible and successful manner (Reigeluth et al., 2016).

Consistent with the focus of this study, I planned the sessions of my course with an

outcomes-based approach. Therefore, I prepared the lesson plan by organizing the teaching/
 134

learning activities (TLAs) for each session in alignment with the Intended Learning (ILs) that

should be achieved by the students in a Unit of Learning.

All teaching/ learning activities set for students should be seen as having value and to be

readily performable; students should be required to build on what they already know; to

be relevantly active, to receive formative feedback and to be engaged in monitoring and

reflecting on their own learning. A potential teaching/ learning activity should meet these

general criteria before it is aligned to the particular ILOs it is to facilitate. (Biggs & Tang,

2007, p. 91)

I developed my teaching/ learning sessions within the following formats:

• First day of class: introduction

• Lecture and studio

• Studio: working class

• Studio: project submission, presentation and critique

My plan for the sessions and their formats in the four ULs of ART1021- Summer 2017 is

depicted in Table 4. I organized each of the three Units of Learning that were planned on an art-

based project within five successive sessions starting from project brief to the final submission/

presentation and critique while the five sessions of the group research assignment activities

including the library workshop and individual consultation session with the librarian as well as

group discussions were simultaneously integrated along the sessions that covered the art-based

units. I should note that each artwork-based UL was comprised of two final artworks as the

creative deliverables of the project.

 135

Table 4

Teaching and Learning Session Formats Within the Units of Learning: ART1021 Foundation

Design II: Colour Theory and Practice- Summer 2017.

Units of UL1- Project 1 UL2- Project 2 UL3- Project 3 UL4- Project 4

Learning à

Day 2/ Project Day 6/ Project Day 10/ Project Day 3/ Project

Brief Brief Brief Brief

Day 3/ Lecture Day 7 & 8/ Day 11/ Lecture Day 5/ Library

& Studio Lecture & & Studio Workshop
Studio
Day/ Session
Formats -à Day 4 & 5/ Day 9/ Studio: Day 12/ Studio: Day 7/ Studio:
Studio: Working Class Working Class Individual
Working Class Consultation
with Librarian

Day 8/
Individual
Library
Worksheet
Submission

Day 9/ Studio:
Group
Discussion
Day 6/ Studio: Day 10/ Studio: Day 13/ Studio: Day 14/ Studio:
Submission, Submission, Submission, Group
Presentation & Presentation & Presentation & Presentation
Critique Critique Critique

First Day of Class. I used a specific approach in the planning of the first day of class

which I believed was of high importance. The first day of class is the first time that students meet

me - their teacher - as well as their peers. It is an introduction to the course, the semester plan

and my expectations as their teacher. Therefore, my plan was to provide my students with the big

picture and the important information that they need to get motivated and organized. The first
 136

session is also planned to create trust, build rapport and make a good impression while making

sure that my students are not overwhelmed with too much information.

Lecture and Studio. The occurrence of the lecture and studio sessions in my planning

differed from the first semester to the second. I used this format in most of my teaching/ learning

sessions in the first semester but in the second semester, I only considered this format in the

launch of the Unit of Learning. In this way, the timetable of the first semester courses that I

planned and taught such as ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space mostly included the

lecture/ studio format throughout the semester while in the second semester courses such as

ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice, the lecture/ studio format made up

half of the sessions with the Studio format having more prominence.

In this format, I considered the lecture as a formal, structured and interactive medium of

communication to engage my students with the theoretical concepts that would inform their

creative practice. I developed Power Point presentations and handouts using multiple resources

such as textbooks, academic papers or reliable Internet sources such as blogs and videos. To

engage my students and create interaction during the lecture, I tasked my students to keep a

sketchbook (Figure 18) to take notes and exercise based on the questions that I posed, or mini-

design activities that I proposed during the lecture. I designed short and concise lectures with a

good balance of text and visuals.

 137

Figure 18

Sample Sketchbook- Element of Design: Colour by Zan Ding

Studio: Working Class. I developed the working class studio time as a free learning

space to enable my students to become engaged within the creative process through the iterative

cycles of concept development. While I planned each of those supervised sessions to work on

one phase of concept development- from visual research, sketching and thumbnail development

to the creation of roughs and final concept- I intended to create a friendly and creative

environment where my students were able to flow within the conceptualization process based on

their own personal thinking and doing style. In this format, students could work independently on

their project while interacting with their peers and enjoying the social energy that would support

them in achieving their step-by-step goals within the creative process.

Studio: Project Submission, Presentation and Critique. This studio format was planned

as the final session of a Unit of Learning. I organized this session for the final production phase

of the project for the students who needed more time to implement the final touches on their
 138

artworks or needed to use the School’s physical space and its equipment such as computer,

printer or photocopier, to complete the other components of the project such as writing a

rationale. The final portion of the session was planned for the presentation and constructive

critique of the works on a volunteer basis. In some of my courses, mostly those in the first

semester, I developed critique sheets for structured peer feedback and analysis that was to be

completed and submitted for summative assessment along with the other components of the

project while in some courses such as ART1021, presentation, peer feedback and critique took an

unstructured and open format for formative feedback (see “Sample Critique Sheet” in Appendix

G viii).

Digital Interaction: Blackboard. Since all the courses that I teach in the Art and Design

Foundation program take place in the physical environment, I used the college’s Blackboard

platform as a complementary interface to enhance my communication with the students in a

more efficient way. Prior to each session, I created weekly/ daily folders which contained all the

teaching documents that would be providing to the students during each teaching/ learning

session such as lectures, readings, handouts, guidelines, letter to students, library workshop

presentation, project samples and other relevant resources such as website links.

In addition, I created separate folders for each assignment and gradually uploaded all the

relevant documents that I provided to my students during the class time in weekly/ daily folders

on Blackboard. My goal was to provide my students with constant digital access to the teaching

materials that students needed for the successful completion of their assignment in a clear and

organized manner. Separate folders were created for other documents such as the orientation

material, course outline and additional resources. I also used the digital platform for some

assignment submissions such as group assignments and grading.

 139

Phase A.1.2- Act

In this section I describe the actions that I took in my teaching throughout the four

phases of motivation, comprehension, practice and application of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5,

p. 78) with an emphasis on my teaching practice in the ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour

Theory and Practice taught in the Summer 2017. For this purpose, I used document analysis

(teaching documents and written communication) and the review of my action logs/ notes

recorded during the case study to define the actions that I took in my teaching based on my

values, beliefs and experience.

Motivation: To Inspire. I believe that motivation is the first stepping stone of any

human endeavour. I motivate my students by taking the following actions:

Show That We Have a Working Plan. I think the best way to encourage learning in a

structured environment is to show that there is a plan and that the plan is working (Crocker,

2020). Therefore, I dedicated a good time to explain my plan for the course, first in the beginning

of the semester by going through the course outline, again when I started a new Unit of Learning

by fully explaining the different components of the project, and finally, by developing an agenda

for each teaching/ learning session (see “Sample Agenda” in Appendix G vi). In this way, I

motivated my students to set goals, become organized and develop the discipline that they need

to succeed.

Course Outline. I distributed the hard copy of the course outline in the first day of class

and posted the digital version on Blackboard (see “ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour

Theory and Practice Course Outline– S2017” in Appendix G iii). As well, I kept the extra copies

for the students who were not present in the first class to make sure everyone had access to the

document. I spent one hour to present all the sections of the course outline to my students. I
 140

wrote down the course code, course name, my name and my email address, and all pertinent

information on the whiteboard.

I talked to my students about the important role of the Essential Employability Skills and

course outcomes in shaping their current education in the field of art and design, and as well in

supporting them throughout their personal and professional life after graduation. I explained how

those soft skills and hard skills were integrated within their projects and other learning activities.

I explained the delivery methods and learning activities to set a clear understanding of the

way I had structured the course delivery and its platforms. Then I reviewed the list of the

recommended textbooks, other scholarly resources and art materials or digital equipment/

software necessary for the course, make recommendations about the essential items that they

needed to acquire and how they could get access to those materials and resources.

Next, I went over the assignment policy practiced at the School of Design and clarified

my own approach to project deadlines and my expectations about late assignment submissions. I

explained my belief in the crucial role of focus management versus time management and my

understanding that learners, mostly in the creative field, may have to complete their work within

different timeframes. Therefore, I asked my students to put their best efforts into meeting the

deadlines but let me know beforehand if they could not meet the due dates in order to negotiate

an extension. I talked at length about my pedagogical practice of rewarding my students instead

of penalization, and my belief that failure happens when we don’t take action.

Then, I reviewed the projects with a summary of their description and due dates, and

asked students to add those deadlines to their calendar. At the end, I talked about the topical

outline and the daily structure of the course. I stressed the role of the daily plans as mentioned in

the course outline to set up clear agendas, mostly if students wanted to plan ahead or to catch up.
 141

Finally, I explained that while class attendance is not graded at George Brown College,

active participation in the classroom is very important and is evaluated through supervised in-

class studio activities such as sketchbook exercises, mini-design activities, in-class discussions

and one-on-one consultation sessions that take place during the class time.

Units of Learning. In the beginning of each Unit of Learning, I distributed the project

sheet and the rubric (see “Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv), and explained the goal, the

process, the required material, the timeline, the deliverables and the evaluation criteria. To

motivate my students about the project and its activities, I showed them successful sample works

from my previous students (Figure 19) and put my students in small teams to talk about those

works with a critical lens. I then asked them to share their insights they had identified in the

group discussion with their classmates. In this way, my students became inspired by the

successful achievements of the previous cohorts and could imagine their own success in the

completion of the project. Figure 19 shows the samples works from my past students for Project

3 that I have put on display.

 142

Figure 19

Display of Project 3 Student Sample Works- ART1021- Summer 2017

Daily Motivation: Agenda. I developed agendas for each session of my course and

shared them with my students both in the classroom (Figure 20) as well as on Blackboard (See

“Sample Agenda - Day 2- ART1021 Summer 2017” in Appendix G vi). I think having an agenda

encouraged my students to become self-organized and supported them in the strategic planning

of their learning and thus, the development of effective study habits.

Figure 20

Sample Agenda on Whiteboard- Day 2- ART1021 Summer 2017

I believe that understanding the big picture, the process and the outcomes is a powerful

way to become inspired and to imagine success (Biggs & Tang 2007; Crocker, 2020).
 143

Build Trust and Respect. In the first day of class, I introduced myself and talked about

my teaching experience to create a trusting rapport with my students. I think students will

become more motivated by knowing about their teachers, their background and their experience.

Throughout the semester and during the lectures or informal conversations in the studio time, I

motivated my students by telling them about my own learning journey in art and design, and

sharing short stories about my past experience that are relevant to their current learning context. I

wanted my students to know we are all human and we may make mistakes, but we can learn

from our mistakes to become better in our life as well as in our artistic journey. Understanding

that success comes after failure helped my students to overcome their fears of making mistakes

and motivated them to experiment, to trust the process and learn by doing which is an important

aspect of the creative process.

In the first day of class, I called everyone’s name and asked my students to tell me the

correct pronunciation of their names and their nicknames - if applicable - as I had a multicultural

classroom with international students, and sometimes names looked unfamiliar to me. I asked my

students, mostly in the first semester, to first complete a questionnaire about themselves and tell

me about their background, their goals and their aspirations (See “About Me Questionnaire” in

Appendix G vii) and then introduce themselves to the student who was sitting next to them.

Gradually, I learned everyone’s name throughout the semester and mostly after the first project

submission. Going through their creative process to evaluate their artworks helped me to connect

with my students in a personal level which I think is needed to generate interest and passion, and

support creative endeavours.

While giving instructions and talking about the tasks that should be achieved, I used we

instead of you to create a sense of togetherness and collaboration. I wanted to assure my students
 144

that they were not alone in their learning journey and that we would be supporting each other

along the way. By staying calm and friendly, and using a respectful tone and behaviour, I

encouraged my students to do the same. In this way, we built together a trusting and comfortable

learning environment where we could learn and grow.

Keep the Line of Communication Open. I believe that an effective communication is key

to creating good rapport and increase the level of motivation. Depending on the dynamic of the

classroom, I adapted my approach to optimize the way I communicated with my students. I

understood that my students have different personalities and learning styles so I needed to

communicate with them in different ways.

While some of the students were talkative and asked questions, others were shy or quiet,

and seemed to avoid talking or communicating with others. In this case, I approached them with

some friendly questions to initiate conversation. I shared my digital contact information with my

students and answered their questions to the best of my knowledge. I stressed the importance of

effective communication skills in their future career success and explained the various tools they

could use to keep the lines of communication open. Fun ice breakers and small team exercises

are some helpful tactics that I used throughout the semester to increase the level of

communication, mostly in the first semester when students were new to one another and to the

learning environment as well.

Comprehension: To Inform. In this section, I outline the actions that I took in art and

design-based courses to facilitate the comprehension of knowledge and its use in different

contexts so that my students became able to develop their own personal understanding of the

newly acquired knowledge and their own personal theory on the way things work.
 145

Create an Environment That Values Sharing and Curiosity. I teach in a discipline

where creativity and passion should be nurtured and celebrated. As a teacher, I believe that my

role is to create a positive learning environment that welcomes curiosity and encourages sharing

of knowledge and skills in a voluntary and constant basis. Therefore, I promoted learning

through research and critical thinking. I explained to my students that we were living, learning

and working in the 21st century which meant that we had access to an infinite amount of

information facilitated by new technologies. Thus, I stressed my belief that learning is not a mere

transfer of knowledge from the teacher to the learner but an ongoing collaborative effort that

necessitates curiosity and proactivity toward gaining the knowledge that we need in our field of

practice and that this cannot happen without a new approach to teaching and learning.

I think my students appreciated that in this new learner-centered paradigm, learning the

know-how (explicit knowledge) has more significance than the know-what (tacit knowledge) as

everyone around the world has easy access to information but knowing what information is

needed to solve a problem in a specific context, where to find that information, and how to

analyze and synthesize the collected information to come up with a solution are the real sought-

after skills of the new century (Reigeluth et al., 2016).

Therefore, while sharing the information that I had collected from different resources on

a specific topic, I motivated my students to ask their own questions, and conduct their own

inquiry both individually and in collaboration with their peers in order to develop their own

understanding of the content.

Foster Self-Learning by Empowering the Learners. Throughout course assignments and

the design process, I supported my students to become self-learners which was one of the
 146

essential skills that I wanted my students to acquire throughout their education in the Art and

Design Foundation Program.

To support my students in their journey of self-discovery and self-awareness in the field

of art and design, I developed creative projects such as Reflection of Self for the illustration part

of the colour wheel project in the Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice, and Self-

Presentation in the Art and Design Portfolio Showcase where my students developed their own

artistic portfolio. I proposed creative tools such as mind-mapping, sketching, concept-mapping

and reflective journal writing to explore new ideas and develop new concepts.

Customize Learning Through Flexible and Adaptable Instructional Structures. In my

role as the facilitator of knowledge development and a strong believer of customized education, I

designed instructional structures - from the course outline to the course plan and the project

briefs (see “ART1021 Foundation Design II Course Outline-S2017” in Appendix G iii and

“Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv)- that offer students with options and alternative plans.

Foundation Design I: Form and Space is a first semester course and the prerequisite

course for Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice which introduces students to the

language and vocabulary of art and design. In this course, I planned projects that started with

some level of limitation in terms of material, medium and size of the final work in the beginning

of the semester and gradually move toward higher level of complexity where students are offered

to use a variety of media such as analog, digital or mixed-media with more creative freedom in

terms of topic or subject matter, storytelling, medium and size of the final artwork.

While in the first semester, my weekly lesson plans included one hour lecture and two

hours studio work, I included less lecture and more studio time throughout my second semester

courses. In the first day of the first semester, I explained to my students that the tacit knowledge
 147

and theory that I delivered on a specific topic during the lectures should be learned to inform

their practice and that is the reason why I removed tests and quizzes from my course plans based

on this belief that memorization of the theory is not an effective way to support their learning.

While I stressed the importance of meeting project deadlines, I understand that learning

can happen within different timeframes for different learners (Spady, 1994, 2020) so I negotiated

new deadlines with some of my students based on their progress in the project.

Practice: To Coach. Practice is the third phase of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, p. 78)

which is essential for giving life to the content by action. I believe that practice can begin

proactively during the comprehension phase and continue during the studio working time under

the teacher’s supervision. Practice is the foundation of future decision-making and the initiation

of new experiences.

Learning By Doing. I supported my students in the implementation of the new

knowledge by developing lesson plans with lesson objectives that were aligned with the course

outcomes which I thought would help them gain experience through practice. Thus, learning by

doing became the heart of learning in an art and design studio environment. (Kalaitzidis et al.,

2017; Kolb, 1984; Kopera-Frye et al., 2008)

At the end of the lecture, we reviewed the key concepts learned during the lecture by

asking each student to come up with one key term and then, in assigned teams, find examples of

their learning in the practice of artists and designers to be later presented in the classroom.

In the beginning of a Unit of Learning, I encouraged my students to trust the design

process by drawing their ideas on their sketchbooks. I tasked them to come up with as many

ideas as possible and as fast as they could within 20-30 minutes, and without any judgement.

Then I asked them to look at their sketches and share their ideas with their peers for insights.
 148

During this process, I moved around the classroom and gave feedback to help in the selection

process. In this way, students learned to become active learners through experimentation and

trial and error.

Learning to Make Decisions. Being able to choose between a number of alternatives and

the ability to make decisions is one of the most crucial aspects of the art and design education. In

real life, artists and designers should be able to make decisions in different phases of the creative

process. Thus, learning to make decisions was one of the pillars of my planning for the practice

phase of the Learning Cycle. Students should learn how to select the best ideas from their

concepts and as well the best medium and techniques that can help them to develop those

concepts into artworks or designs that successfully meet the requirements of the project.

Furthermore, they need to learn how to set up relevant criteria that will help them to evaluate

available options for best results.

Therefore, I developed evaluation rubrics based on the outcomes and requirements of

each project (see “Teaching Documents” in Appendix G iv). I explained the evaluation criteria as

a checklist for the completion of the project. In this way, I intended to teach my students that

they need to learn how to set up evaluation factors in each phase of the project to help them

make objective decisions about the actual concepts and find the best solution for the problem.

Generally, those criteria include the categories of Research, Concept Development, Design,

Workmanship and Presentation with the category of Design having the highest grade.

Moving together through the different phases of the design process during the studio time

is an effective way to coach my students in terms of setting up priorities and managing the time

that should be spent in each phase of the creative process. In this way, I provided them with the
 149

guidance that they needed in their journey of self-awareness and personalized learning in design

education.

Initiate New Experiences. My students join the Art and Design Foundation Program

from a variety of backgrounds and experiences. As mentioned on the GBC website (2021), “this

program is designed for students who want to explore a variety of art and design disciplines, to

develop their portfolio for further study or for those who wish to enjoy learning creative skills in

a studio-based environment” (https://www.georgebrown.ca/programs/art-and-design-foundation-

program-g108). Thus, courses in this program are planned to cater learners at different levels.

To build new experiences, students should first discover new possibilities. Therefore, I

encouraged my students to experiment with a variety of materials and techniques using the

language and the vocabulary of art and design. While introducing my students to new theoretical

concepts or new artistic styles such as the School of Bauhaus, I asked them to reflect about what

they liked and why they liked it. In this way, they learned about the possibility of materials in the

work of artists and designers, and as well their own ability to master the use of those materials

and techniques to develop their own unique personal style.

I also stressed the value of past experiences in creating new ones. In Art and Design

Portfolio Showcase, I assigned my students to reflect about their past, their present and their

future and complete a SWOC (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges) table of

their competencies (knowledge, skills and attitudes) based on their future interests. I then advised

them in planning the path forward by building upon their strengths to move beyond their

weaknesses and explore new opportunities to overcome the challenges that they were facing in

their quest to become successful practitioners.

 150

Application: To Mentor. The final phase of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, P. 78) is the

application of the new learning. I guided my students to learn about the application of their

newly acquired knowledge and experience through structured activities, demonstrations, self-

critique, informal feedback and learning from practitioner’s experience.

Self- Reflection and Constructive Criticism. One of the components of the projects that I

developed in my courses is writing a rationale. Writing a rationale serves different goals in a

design project: while it provides me with an effective way to evaluate the occurrence of learning,

it helps my students to demonstrate the development of their personal theory, its application into

practice and as well their reflection on their personal creative journey and self-improvement.

I developed customized critique worksheets using the evaluation criteria of the rubric for

self-evaluation and peer-evaluation. These mini-activities took place at the end of each Unit of

Learning during the studio time which is dedicated to final production, submission, presentation

and critique. Through guided questions (see “Sample Critique Sheet” in Appendix G viii),

students were tasked to first reflect on their own work in comparison with others, mention what

they had learned and how they could improve. Then, choose their peer’s work and explain the

strengths, and the weaknesses of that work in meeting the outcomes of the project and finally, to

share ideas for further improvement.

At the end of the session, I put the final works on display and invited my students to talk

about their work and their process by asking questions, and facilitating an informal conversation

in the classroom. I encouraged everyone to give their opinion about their peers’ final piece using

the terminology of design.

I explained to my students how this exercise would prepare them to deliver professional

presentations and enable them to provide constructive feedback to their peers in real life
 151

scenarios where designers are working in teams, and need to articulate their design process to get

feedback from their colleagues.

Giving and Getting Feedback. During the studio time, I engaged my students in constant

development of their design concepts and project work by using formative feedback, informal

conversation and ongoing guidance throughout the semester.

I conducted summative assessments at the end of each Unit of Learning in the form of

authentic assessment using clear evaluation criteria. I graded my students by completing the

rubric sheets based on the submitted works and distributed them back along with the project

packages. I asked my students to fill out a waiver form and the permission to keep their good

works for the Year End show that takes place at the School of Design in April and at the end of

each academic year. I then scheduled a post-evaluation meeting with the students who were

willing to learn more about their performance in my course. Similarly, I sent standard warning

letters to the students with poor performance to inform them about their lack of progress and

scheduled meetings with those students to discuss a learning plan for their successful completion

of the course.

At the end of the semester, I invited my students to complete the online Student Feedback

Questionnaire (SFQ) provided by the College. I stressed the importance of their feedback in my

teaching practice with the goal of improvement.

Learning From Practitioners. Knowing about other people’s journey is a powerful way

of learning. Therefore, we explored the application of learned theory in the work of artists and

designers through research projects and practitioner’s talk.

In groups, students were assigned to study the language of art and design, methods and

techniques in art and design practices. While we explored the elements of art and principles of
 152

design in the first semester, in the second semester, we focused on the use of colour in the

development of artistic expression.

Finally, students were grouped based on their future career interests in the creative

industries to research the professions and their different branches through an exploration of best

portfolios and successful practices in Art and Design Portfolio Showcase. I encouraged my

students to conduct an interview with a prominent artist or designer of their choice. I also invited

the graduates of the Art and Design Foundation Program who are studying or working in other

fields such as graphic design, game art, interaction design or illustration to talk about their

experience in our program and present their portfolios to my students.

I always stress out the relationship between education and the needs of the industry which

value graduates equipped with high level of soft skills as I believe having strong technical skills

is given when people have the necessary credentials from prominent higher education

institutions.

Phase A.2- Research

As a practitioner, I am constantly reflecting on what I see and what I do to make things

better. Thus, I believe observation and reflection occur naturally in a learning environment. In

this action research study, I documented my observations of the setting as well as my reflection

on the events that took place during the teaching-learning sessions of ART1021 Foundation

Design II: Colour Theory and Practice that I taught in the Summer 2017 using different tools

such as observational and conceptual notes, anecdotal records, reflective journals and

photographs.

The observational notes that I collected are focused on the actions by watching the

participants’ dynamic in their natural setting, and conceptual notes constituted my personal
 153

statements on the significance of the observed facts which helped me to construct meaning from

observation. My notes are organized based on both the objective account of the observed

interactions that I found meaningful in my teaching as well as my own interpretation of the

events through analytical observation. I used the photographs of my students who were engaged

within the teaching-learning environment as complementary evidence that I believe will enrich

the quality of my research narrative (see “Figures for Chapter Four and Chapter Five” in

Appendix G x).

Reflection takes place within the process of reflexivity in two different ways: reflection-

in-action and reflection-on-action (Schön, 1983). Reflection-in-action occurs during the action

and through the observation of the interaction between teacher-learner, learner-learner, and

learner-content in the classroom, while reflection-on-action is the thinking process that happens

after the occurrence of the cycles of actions and interactions.

Therefore, in the Research stage of my Action Research Cycle (see Figure 4, p. 75), I

explain my Observation of the events as well as my Reflection on the actions-interactions that

have taken place throughout the phases of Motivation, Comprehension, Practice and Application

of the Learning Cycle in the four Units of Learning of my case study with an outcomes-based

and learning-centered approach. The purpose of this part of my study is to come up with a

critical understanding of the Action that I have taken in the Plan and Act cycles of my teaching

depicted in the previous sections.

Observation: Motivation/ To Inspire

My Students. The student participants in my case study and I were familiar to one

another as I was their teacher in the first half of the Spring/ Summer semester 2017 in the Design

Process course, most of them belonged to the same cohort and knew each other throughout the
 154

academic year. This was their second semester in the program so there was a sense of comfort

when we came together again in July for the Foundation Design II course. The cohort looked

motivated, passionate and dedicated, and showed enthusiasm and determination throughout the

semester.

First Day of Class. I assigned my students to work in groups to review their learning of

the elements and principles of design from the first semester. Each group was formed based on

their interest in exploring the relationship between the element of design and colour (see

“Figures 1–9” in Appendix G x). Although this in-class activity was not to be graded, students

quickly came together in teams and enjoyed working on this activity.

I provided my students with magazines, papers, glue stick, scissors, x-acto and black

foam boards, and they used them in an efficient and creative way. The final works show a strong

understanding of the elements of art and principles of design, and their relationship to the

element of colour as interpreted by the students. Despite the freedom of final visual structure,

students worked on creating meaningful designs to show the relationship between colour and the

other elements of art (see “Figures 10–15” in Appendix G x).

Reflection: Motivation/ To Inspire

Reflection Questions. How do I influence and inspire my students? How do I become

influenced and inspired by my students?

My Reflection. I think the first day of class was the most important session to set up the

goals and clarify the expectations for the whole semester. Doing a fun group activity was also a

very effective way to begin the course by creating a friendly and enjoyable environment. In an

art and design classroom, motivation comes from passion in a way that students become

motivated and inspired by creating artworks. Working in groups supported my students to build
 155

trust by reaching a common goal. By the way they developed their artworks, my students

inspired me to come up with new ideas that I could incorporate in my teaching.

Observation: Comprehension/ To Inform

Lecture/ Studio Session. In each Unit of Learning in ART1021, I provided students with

one session of lecture followed by studio time. In my lectures which usually take no more than

60–65 minutes, I presented the information they needed to be able to complete the project of the

correspondent Unit of Learning. I used Power Point presentations to deliver the theoretical

concepts that was needed in the making of the final artworks in each project. Figure 16 (see

Appendix G x) shows the classroom prepared for lecture.

During the lectures, I moved around the class and kept my eye contact with all of my

students. While most of the time my students attentively followed my lectures, I noticed that

some of them kept themselves busy by working in their computer, taking notes or drawing in

their sketchbooks. I asked questions about the elements and principles of design that they could

identify in the artworks and their opinion about the works of art displayed in the slides, what they

liked and what they disliked based on the theoretical concepts delivered during the lectures.

Reflection: Comprehension/ To Inform

Reflection Questions. How much theory do I need to include in my teaching? How do I

transfer the knowledge to my students? How do I deliver lectures that keep my students engaged

and focused?

My Reflection. I believe that my students were genuinely interested in learning about the

foundation of colour and the way artists develop their artistic style through the use of colours and

colour combinations which motivated them to stay focused during my lectures. Using visuals,

images and some guiding texts in my presentation slides helped my students to stay engaged by
 156

taking notes and asking questions. Posting the lectures on Blackboard prior to the class, helped

some students to follow my lectures in their personal computer and take notes on the Power

Points for later review.

I have realized some of my students who seemed not paying direct attention to my

lectures were still grasping the main concepts discussed in the classroom as demonstrated in their

artworks. While keeping eye contact and physical closeness to all the students throughout the

lectures was an effective way of engaging my students, it also helped me to evaluate the

effectiveness of the knowledge and the instructional method that I was using in bringing their

attention to the theory.

Asking questions from my students was a way to pause and reflect from one subject

matter to a new one, although there were mostly the same students answering my questions. I

often used this technique to disrupt the monotony of hearing my own voice for a brief moment,

to create a quite space to encourage my students thinking and as well to ignite their curiosity,

even if some of them were not giving answers to my questions.

Observation: Practice/ To Coach

Studio Session/ Working Class. The studio time is when students have the opportunity

to work on their project in a non-structured and flexible environment. During the ART1021

course, students were engaged in studio sessions after the lecture as well as the following full

hour classes depending on the timeline of the project within the unit of learning.

In the beginning of each studio session, I wrote down the instructions on the whiteboard

and displayed student sample works as depicted Figures 17–22 ( see Appendix G x). In this way

students were able to have a guideline on the important points and tasks that they had to consider

in their work and see the examples of my former students. I noticed that students were taking
 157

pictures of the instructions for later reference. While some students preferred to work alone (see

Figures 23 & 24 in Appendix G x), others were tending to stay together (see Figures 25 & 26 in

Appendix G x).

As depicted in Figures 27 and 28 (see Appendix G x), students were using the worksheet

and their colour wheel that they had produced as their references during the process work.

Students were comfortable displaying their work-in-progress throughout the studio session as

shown in Figures 29–31 (see Appendix G x).

During the studio session, I observed my students and supervised their work-in-progress.

I provided students with a free and comfortable space to create flow and foster their creativity

while keeping an eye on the ones who had questions or needed support. I worked with students,

alone or in groups, to demonstrate the making techniques such as drawing the colour wheel or

mixing colours to come up with the desired result.

From time to time, I chatted with students while they were working on their project,

giving instructions or feedback on their work. Sometimes students were interested to talk about

other related topics such as artists styles or their own interests in art and design. I was open and

available to accommodate my students’ needs and support their artistic practice throughout the

studio time without any restrictions of movement or activities such as having snacks or listening

to music as long as they were not disrupting their peers’ work. I observed that those activities

were supporting them to be more productive while working in the classroom.

While I was available to answer students’ questions throughout the studio session, I

referred back those who were absent during the lecture time or had questions about the content

related to their assignment to review the lecture or the worksheet for more clarification. Figure

32 (see Appendix G x) shows the computer screens being open on the course material posted on
 158

Blackboard that students were checking to complete their works. I noticed that most often they

were able to start working right after reviewing the material or coming up with new questions

that they were discussing with me.

The research activity that we conducted with the support of the Liaison Librarian looked

challenging to my students. Although my students enjoyed attending the research workshop that

took place in the library, completing the attached worksheet seemed like a difficult task to be

achieved. Mostly, students did not seem eager or ready to talk to the Librarian in the one-on-one

session that I had organized on another day despite the opportunity of having the librarian

present in the classroom. Some of the students looked overwhelmed by the task at hand while

some others continued working on their other art-based projects during that session and simply

submitted their completed worksheet by the end of the session.

Overall, students seemed to be enjoying the studio sessions while working on the creative

process of their projects. Despite having the choice to work at home, they had regular attendance

in the studio time and had a friendly interaction with me and one another. Particularly, one of my

students demonstrated leadership skills and compassion throughout the semester. She attended

all of the sessions and was highly passionate and engaged in all the activities. She was

voluntarily helping her peers by answering their questions and explaining some of the concepts

during the studio sessions. In addition to working hard on her own assignments, she was often

checking on her peers and giving positive and encouraging feedback. Her cheerful and vivid

presence in the classroom created a very positive energy among her peers and encouraged them

to become more active and energized despite the workload and the deadlines.

The freedom of movement and activities allowed during the studio time encouraged my

students to achieve their goals and complete their projects in a successful and timely manner. In
 159

this aspect, the whole School of Design became the classroom. Figure 33 (see Appendix G x)

shows students working on their art piece outside of the classroom in one of the dedicated

workspaces at the School.

Reflection: Practice/ To Coach

Reflection Questions. How do I motivate and engage my students to appreciate

conducting research in their art making process? How do I support my students to be creative

without the fear of making mistakes? How do I encourage peer support and effective interaction

in the classroom?

My Reflection. I think that research has a very important role in the art and design

process. Reflecting back, I believe that my students were already using some research tools like

looking at the student samples and searching some theoretical concepts or artworks in the

Internet but these activities were happening in a non-structured environment and without the

knowledge of scholarly research guidelines. Having the College’s Librarian in the classroom

helped my students to learn about the vast research resources at the College and as well the

importance of giving credit to their resources and mostly learning about guidelines on copyright

protected materials. My students learned that creativity partly comes from becoming inspired by

other people’s work but they needed to ask for permission from the artists who inspire them the

same way they expect others to ask their permission in using their artworks. In this way, they

also learned that research in visual art and design is about acknowledging the ownership of

artistic creation which should be practiced at all level of their education.

One of the aspects of my students’ creative practice that always makes me think is their

fear of making mistakes, which I believe is one of the main reasons that causes procrastination

and anxiety in the start of the creative process. By showing the diversity of creative approach in
 160

my previous students’ artworks, I supported my students to overcome their fears and encouraged

them to realize that their artistic creation is both experiential and unique, that they have to trust

the process and defer the judgment for later. I think asking them to come up with many quick

sketches and ideas helped them realize that creative endeavour starts with bringing all their ideas

on the paper before making decisions about the concept that they really like to develop for final

production.

Having students help each other is a powerful tool in a creative environment. I think the

cohort of my case study had a very good relationship with one another as they knew each other

from the first semester and had already created a friendly rapport among themselves. While some

of my students had organically shaped their own mini-support groups and were working

together, some few others were flowing within groups and interacting with everyone at different

levels. From time to time, I was encouraging students to showcase their process work with the

whole class or asking students to go around and look at each other’s work. I think this helped my

students to appreciate the variety of approaches in each project and as well to broaden their

perspective on what can be done within the limitations of the project.

Observation: Application/ To Mentor

Studio Session/ Project Submission, Presentation and Critique. The last session of

each Unit of Learning is dedicated to the final production, submission, presentation and critique

of the projects. Students are free to move in and out of the classroom to work on their final

deliverables which often include the final artwork (s) and the written document or rationale. In

my case study, some of the students were still focused on their final painting pieces, while some

others were working on their writing. Students are always asked to submit their process works
 161

and rationale in an envelope with their names and other pertinent information. Figure 34–36 (see

Appendix G x) show one of the students completing the painting of their artwork.

Students did not seem being nervous or anxious about their final submission in any of

those final sessions of the Units of Learning. Some of the students had negotiated with me for a

brief extension which I had granted to them regarding the nature of the work but they were

present in the class to continue working on their painting and listen to the final presentations. I

always asked my students to put their final artwork on display and set up a time for everyone to

be back in the classroom to present their final work. Figure 37 (see Appendix G x) depicts some

of the final works of Project 1 on display.

In the final session of the Units of Learning, I encouraged all of my students who had

submitted their final piece to present their work by explaining their process, what makes their

work successful and how they can improve. Figures 38 and 39 (see Appendix G x) show the final

artwork of Project 3 and its presentation by one of the students. While some students confidently

presented their work by thoroughly explaining their process work, some others were less

expressive and did not mention all the important points learned during the UL to describe their

work. In those cases, I asked some questions to guide my students for a deeper and more

complete explanation of their project. Although, this activity was not graded, it was a way to

articulate and review some of the theoretical concepts learned during the lectures and class

discussions.

Constructive criticism of artworks and designs is one of the important skills that students

need to learn to achieve the program learning outcomes in each course. Therefore, I have

embedded this activity in all of the projects of the courses that I teach in the Art and Design

Foundation Program. While I have developed specific worksheets for critique that I grade as a
 162

part of the project submission in some of my courses, I also dedicate the final hour of the studio

working time of project submission session to critique and review. During my case study, I

encouraged my students to give each other constructive feedback based on the evaluation criteria

defined in the rubric of each project. There were few students who gave very good evaluation to

their peers in all projects while some other students just listened and did not actively participate

in the critique time.

Figures 40 and 41 (see Appendix G x) demonstrate the Project 4 presentation of the

group research on the Practice of Colour in Art and Design. One student is using a Power Point

presentation to deliver their research. The presenter is angled toward the screen and does not

engage the audience in an open manner. While some students are not directly looking at the

presenter, the majority of students are listening and seem engaged and interested.

Reflection: Application/ To Mentor

Reflection Questions. How do I evaluate my students’ creative works? How do I engage

my students to continue their learning during and after the application of the theoretical concepts

in their projects?

My Reflection. Developing evaluation criteria for creativity-based assignments has

always been very important in my teaching practice. Thinking back about my own experience as

a student in a creative field of study, I was always curious to know how my teachers were

measuring subjective skills such as creativity and originality in my designs. Learning that

creativity like design is both a process and a final product (Mousavi Hejazi & Borja de Mozota

2015) helped me to come up with a better understanding of evaluating my students’ creative

works. Learning that creativity is a process ((Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi, 1976; Mace & Ward,

2002; Patrick, 1937; Yokochi & Okada, 2005) guided me to define the creative process of each
 163

project based on the objective of the assignment and then break it up to tangible parts that are

more objective and measurable.

I consider learning as a lifelong endeavour that should never cease. I always encourage

my students to continue being curious by questioning the state of things. I want them to know

that the ending of a learning journey is the beginning of new possibilities. I want my students to

know they can apply their new knowledge of the elements of art such as colour and space, and

principles of design such as balance and movement in all aspects of their life, that they can

design their life and that each day of their life is an empty canvas that can be transformed to a

work of art. In this way, I encourage my students to consider what they have learned in my

course as a part of the whole which is the journey of life.

Phase A.3- Evaluation

In this section, I evaluate my practice from two main views: My Own View and Others’

View. My Own View is the critical view of my teaching practice based on the findings of my

action-research study in Phase A.2- Research as an insider participant. Others’ View is the lens

used by both the critical observers who were the outsider participants of my study as well as the

view of my students using document analysis tools. In this way, I was able to see and understand

my practice from a variety of viewpoints with different values and standards, which helped me to

develop a better understanding of the actions that I should take in order to improve my teaching.

My Own View

The Ideology Critique tool proposed by Brookfield (1995) inspired me to examine some

of the critical topics emerged from the observation-reflection cycle of my research as the insider

participant of my study. In this section, I discuss my praxis in comparison with the dominant
 164

view practiced within a traditional educational environment where the focus is mainly on the

teacher teaching rather than the student learning.

In each of the four steps of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, p. 78), I describe my

pedagogical belief on one critical topic of interest in teaching fundamentals of art and design in a

learning-centered environment in comparison with the dominant practiced view. My goal is to

determine the difference of pedagogical approaches within the two paradigms of teaching-

centered versus learning-centered and what is being omitted from the dominant view on a

specific critical topic of interest.

My insight of the dominant view has emerged from my informal conversation with some

of my colleagues who participated in my study. An in-depth analysis of my interaction with my

colleagues who were teaching in the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) at the time of

my study (2017-2019) and their insights on course and curriculum planning within an outcomes-

based approach will be discussed in Chapter Five.

Critical Topic: Motivation/ To Inspire. Role of motivation in student success.

Dominant View. Success is just achievable for those students who are self-motivated and

take responsibility for their education. (G108 Faculty Member)

My View. I believe that teachers have an important responsibility to motivate students in

becoming effective learners. By showing passion about teaching the fundamentals of art and

design, engaging students in a productive learning environment and making personal connection

with my students, I invite them to understand the critical role of what they learn in their future

career and in this way I encourage my students to become motivated and take ownership about

their learning as a path to success.

 165

Teachers might worry less about motivating students and more about teaching better…

Motivation is to teach in such a way that students build up a good knowledge base,

achieve success in problems that are significant and build up a feeling of ‘ownership’

over their learning; motivation follows good learning as night follows day. (Biggs &

Tang, 2007, p. 37)

Critical Topic: Comprehension/ To Inform. Role of lecture in a practiced-based/

experiential learning environment.

Dominant View. Teachers are responsible to bring all the information to the students: it

should be one textbook that teachers should cover throughout the semester for lectures. (G108

Faculty Member)

My View. Bringing the theoretical concept of art fundamentals in a way that can be

implemented and practised is one of the most crucial aspects of my teaching pedagogy and my

research. I believe that the role of the teacher in an outcomes-based learning-centered education

is to guide students toward learning the knowledge they need in meeting the learning outcomes

that form the basis of their practice. In this role, teachers themselves become a part of the

learning process by facilitating the discovery and flow of knowledge from a variety of resources,

and using instructional strategies that promote active learning.

In learner-centered courses, content functions to accomplish two purposes: it is used to

build a knowledge base, learner-centered teachers opt for those instructional strategies

that promote deep and lasting learning. They want students to understand the content so

that it is more likely retained and more easily applied… they know the best way to

promote deep learning is by letting students use the content to do the work like that done
 166

in the discipline. From these experiences, students learn how to think like those in the

discipline. (Weimer, 2013, pp. 123-124)

Critical Topic: Practice/ To Coach. Role of the learning environment in the students’

creative process.

Dominant View. Students with intrinsic motivation are just the ones who are successful

in the creative process of art-based projects. (G108 Faculty Member)

My View. Being creative and coming up with creative ideas are some of the main

competencies of practitioners in creative-based disciplines. Johannes Itten's book Design and

Form: The Basic Course at the Bauhaus (1965) starts with this declaration: “the basic goal of my

efforts to teach art had always been the development of the creative personality” (p. 104).

Building up on my research about creativity and the creative process (Botella et al., 2016;

Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Lubart, 2001; Lubart et al., 2015; Meakin, 2012; Osborn, 1953; Reid &

Petocz, 2004), I believe the quality of the learning environment has a crucial role in the

enhancement of the successful achievement of the creative process. Wycoff (1991) defined

creativity as “the act of seeing things that everyone around us sees while making connections

that no one else has made” (p. 22). Therefore, I dedicated a considerable time in my teaching to

talk about creativity and the fact that creativity is not only enhanced by intrinsic motivation and

natural talent but that the skills involved in creative endeavours can be taught, learned and

practiced.

Csíkszentmihályi (1990; 1996b) believed the major distinguishing characteristic of

creative people was the capacity to experience flow, “the state in which people are so involved in

an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience itself is so enjoyable that people will
 167

do it even at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it” (1990, p.4), “they are completely focused

with total immersion in the task” (Meakin, 2012, p. 4).

In a learning-centered environment, teachers need to explore what it means to be creative

within a particular field beyond the intrinsic motivation, how creativity may be encountered,

practiced and produced by students, and what type of climate can create and enhance the creative

experience. In this regard, both the intrinsic and extrinsic factors affect the successful

achievement of tasks in a creative process. “Extrinsic rewards may encourage students to learn

the skills they need to complete a task or to persist when the initial enthusiasm wears off”

(Collins & Amabile, 1999, pp. 6-7).

Therefore, I ask my students to get started with the first phase of their creative process in

the studio time dedicated for practice so that I can guide them throughout the process. I

encourage my students to come up with many ideas and don’t be afraid to make mistakes. I use

positive and encouraging words when evaluating their ideas and help them to make their own

decision on the best direction to follow for further concept development.

Creative solutions emerge over a period that includes moments of insight and times of

struggle, persistence and confusion. Therefore the creative individual must be able to live

with half-formed ideas and possible solutions. They must be willing to keep trying and

experimenting if even if they are not sure if they are right. (Meakin, 2012 p. 7)

Finally, I believe in open-mindedness when reviewing new ideas of my students as I

believe that in the realm of the foundation of art and design, students need to develop their own

unique style throughout their education by building upon their strengths. Csíkszentmihályi

(1996a) found in his study of highly creative individuals that “college or university represented a
 168

high point of life. It was where they found their voice, identified their vocation, and were

exposed to teachers who recognised their unique strengths” (p. 6).

Critical Topic: Application/ To Mentor. Role of assessment in student learning.

Dominant View. Students should complete all the assignments in a course while meeting

all the deadlines in order to receive a passing grade. Students should be penalized for not

meeting the project submission deadlines. (G108 Faculty Member)

My View. Grading student learning is one of the important responsibilities of teachers as

it demonstrates the level of mastery of the learned material as well as the completion of the

learning outcomes. This is the act of measuring one’s competencies demonstrated in project

deliverables.

Unfortunately, all too often it’s the grades, not the learning experience, that matter most

to students and teachers. Learner-centered teaching attempts to redress that imbalance

with activities, assignments, and assessment strategies that include a stronger and more

deliberate focus on learning. (Weimer, 2013, p. 168)

In a teaching-centered educational approach, grading has the tendency to become the

main goal of achieving tasks and completing assignments. One reason may be the role of grades

as a benchmark for mobility in higher education. George Brown College with its outcomes-based

policies and strong commitment to learning-centered principles guide teachers to new

approaches in authentic assessment of students’ learning

(https://www.georgebrown.ca/faculty/teaching-and-learning-exchange/training).

One of the guiding principles at the College is to match the expectations for student

performance to the learning outcomes in a way that the minimum expectations don’t fall below

the level set by the learning outcomes. Another learning-centered practice is to measure students’
 169

works against specific criteria which demonstrate the criterion-based practice of learning-

centered assessment policies at GBC.

While I agree that students should demonstrate the minimum level of learning in their

projects based on the intended learning outcomes, I believe in a more flexible approach to

assessing students’ completion of the projects both in terms of time as well as deliverables. One

of the four principles of outcomes-based education proposed by Spady and Marshall (1991) is

expanded opportunity for all to succeed which “runs against the grain of conventional time-based

grading practices in which grades are treated as permanent and unchangeable on the fixed dates

they are given” (Spady, 2020, p. 37). Therefore, I consider flexible time management planning

and personalization through formative assessment of the process while coaching and supporting

my students in meeting the learning outcomes in their own individual timeline within the time

limit of the assignments.

Based on the learning-centered pedagogical principle which promote learning as another

important outcome of assessment (Weimer, 2013, p. 168), I encourage my students to create

success by learning from the feedback provided by me as well as the self-critique and peer-

evaluation activities that take place throughout the Unit of Learning in order to continue

improving their work. Thus, I share with them my belief that “[we] really only fail when [we]

fail to keep taking action” (Fritz, 2008, p. 95).

Others’ View

In this section, I examine the view of the observer participants of my study as well as my

own students on some of the critical aspects of my teaching praxis that have emerged from my

action research and defined from my own point view. My main goal is to improve my teaching

by understanding what I do effectively and what I need to change in my practice. Therefore, I

 170

use George Brown College’s learning-centered evaluation criteria to evaluate the validity of my

personal theories of learning-centered teaching praxis from other people’s view. My critical

analysis is based on the principles of outcomes-based education emerged from my literature

review of this topic.

Critical Observers. The outsider observers of my study are a former student of the Art

and Design Foundation Program who was continuing her education as a student of Graphic

Design at the School of Design at the time of my study and a professor of the Teaching and

Learning Exchange (TLX) at the College.

Saretta Nawar Khan, who has signed a written consent to be named in the report of my

study (see “Informed Consent – Interested Observer” in Appendix C), is a graduate of the Art

and Design Foundation Program who had successfully completed the ART1021 Foundation

Design II in previous years. Saretta participated in one studio session (Day 7) of the classroom

during my case study in the role of the Interested Observer, took notes and then completed a hard

copy of the questionnaire that I had provided digitally to her in my invitation to the session.

In the first half of the session, I delivered a mini-lecture on Itten’s theory of colour

contrast followed by students working on the different parts of their Project 2- Colour Harmony

Systems (Variations of One Design). Students had to develop colour grids and juxtapose colours

based on the lecture. In the second half, the Liaison Librarian attended our class for a one-on-one

consultation on the Individual Library worksheet that students had to complete based on the

Librarian’s previous workshop on Library resources for their group research assignment in

Project 4- Practice of Colour in Art and Design. Consultation took place in a voluntary basis

while everyone was allowed to simultaneously continue working on their Project 2.

 171

In September 2019, I met with a professor of the TLX at the College who is the Critical

Expert of my study to talk about the action-research study of my teaching practice in the Art and

Design Foundation Program, and discussed some of the findings that had emerged from my

research. I also shared the hard copy of the course outline of ART1021 Foundation Design II:

Colour Theory and Practice for their feedback, and took notes during the meeting. I then invited

the Critical Expert to participate in one of my teaching sessions of ART1020 Foundation Design

I: Form and Space during the Fall semester 2019 to observe my teaching in the classroom. I

received their written feedback in another meeting and discussed their opinion on the

improvement of my teaching.

While I asked three specific questions from the Interested Observer who participated in

my case study (see “Questionnaire for Interested Observer” in Appendix Ci), I had an open-

ended conversation with the Critical Expert (see “Conversation Guide – Critical Expert” in

Appendix Di). I asked the Interested Observer of my study, to answer the following questions

based on her observation of the classroom during the visit:

1. At what moment during this session did you feel students were most engaged with what

was happening?

2. What action that anyone (teacher or student) took in class during the session did you find

most affirming and helpful to student engagement/learning?

3. What about this session surprised you the most? (This could be something about your

own reactions to what went on, or something that someone did, or anything else that

occurred to you.)

In my first meeting with the Critical Expert, I asked their opinion on how I can improve

my teaching based on the constructive alignment of intended learning outcomes, learning

 172

activities and assessment tools in my Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice course

which was the case study of my research. In our second meeting, we discussed the insights

emerged from the Critical Expert’s observation of my teaching in Foundation Design I: Form

and Space which is a first semester course and the prerequisite of Foundation Design II.

My Students. I have come up with informative insights on the critical aspects of my

teaching praxis from the view of my students through the data I have gathered from a variety of

resources. During my case study, I collected data using the Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ)

survey that I adapted from Brookfield (1995) and conducted in one of the sessions of my case

study in ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice, and as well the responses

gathered in the College’s digitally administered Student Feedback Questionnaire (SFQ) that was

completed by the student participant of my case study at the end of the Spring/ Summer semester

2017.

While all the student participants who completed the CIQ survey had consented to be

named in my study, the SFQ was administered by the College at the end of the semester in an

anonymous basis. I have also used other data such as my students’ comments on my teaching

effectiveness outlined on the SFQs of similar courses such as Foundation Design I: Form and

Space, Design Process, and Art and Design Portfolio Showcase that I have taught during my

study from 2016-2019.

The student participants of my study completed the hard copy of the CIQ survey that I

distributed in the classroom on Day 10 of the second half of the Spring/ Semester 2017. It was a

studio session and students were working on the final completion, submission and presentation

of their Project 2- Colour Harmony Systems (Variations of One Design) so many of the

responses are specifically about the project at hand. 13 students out of the 17 students who had
 173

consented to participate in my research were present in that session and completed the CIQ

survey. The students who completed the survey and are named in the analysis have signed a

written consent (See “Informed Consent – Student Participants” in the Appendix B), and some of

them have mentioned their names on the completed questionnaire. I asked my students to answer

the following questions:

1. At what moment during this project did you feel most engaged with what was happening?

2. What action that anyone (teacher or student) took in class during this project did you find

most affirming and helpful?

3. What about this project surprised you the most? (This could be something about your

own reactions to what went on, or something that someone did, or anything else that

occurred to you.)

The Student Feedback Questionnaire (SFQ) (see Appendix G ix) depicts the percentage

of responses from Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree and Not Sure for the

different criteria measured in the SFQ questionnaire based on Course Management/ The Teacher,

Course Content, Overall Effectiveness of the Teacher and the Learning Experience. The response

ratio is 33% with seven students who participated in the survey out of the 21 students who had

registered in the course. Two students never attended the course but did not withdraw from the

course so their names were kept in the College’s system until the end of the semester.

Here are the questions asked from the students under each category:

A. Course Management/ The Teacher

1. Provides information on course outcomes and evaluation methods at the

beginning of the course

2. Conducts the course in a well-organized way

 174

3. Explains concepts clearly

4. Treats students with courtesy

5. Provides helpful comments and feedback

6. Is available at the times indicated (i.e. as stated on the course outline, or online,

or in-class, etc.)

7. Helps me to think independently about the topics in my course

8. Encourages student participation (i.e. by posing questions, through class

discussions and/or group work, etc.)

B. Course Content

1. I understand how the learning activities (e.g. lectures, class discussions,

assignments, etc.) are related to the goals of the course

2. Texts and other materials (e.g. videos, handouts, readings, online learning

tools, etc.) are informative and help me learn the course material

3. Evaluation methods (i.e. assignments, activities, tests, etc.) help me learn the

course material

4. This course motivated me to learn more about the subject

C. Overall Effectiveness of the Teacher

D. Learning Experience in the Course

Based on course type, the comparative scores for the questions under category A- Course

Management/ The Teacher and B- Course Content show the score for each question in

comparison with the College and the School using the scale of 1 to 4 with 4=Strongly Agree,

3=Agree, 2=Disagree, 1=Strongly Disagree. While the overall categories of ‘Effectiveness of the
 175

Teacher’ and the ‘Learning Experience in the Course’ use a scale of 1 to 5 with 5=Excellent,

4=Good, 3=Satisfactory, 2=Unsatisfactory, 1=Poor.

Research Insights. In this section, I analyse the quantitative data gathered in the results

of the SFQ collected by the College for the ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and

Practice course that I have taught as the case study of my research, the qualitative data that I

have collected in this phase from the participants of my study as well as the analysis of the SFQs

of similar courses that I have taught during the period of my study.

My research insights are structured based on the College’s SFQ criteria for measuring

teaching effectiveness as well as the general characteristics of good teaching/ learning contexts

proposed by Biggs and Tang (2007) in achieving the constructive alignment of Intended

Learning Outcomes (ILOs), Teaching/ Learning Activities (TLAs) and Assessment Tasks (ATs)

of the outcomes-based educational paradigm that defines the teaching and learning experience

within the four steps of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, p. 78). I have analyzed the characteristics

of good teaching on the factors mentioned by Biggs and Tang (2007):

1. an appropriate motivational context

2. a well-structured knowledge base

3. relevant learner activity

4. reflective practice and self-monitoring. (pp. 91-92)

Effectiveness of The Teacher: Course Management

At George Brown College, the effectiveness of the teacher is evaluated based on the ways

the teacher manages the different aspects of the course such as the way they interact with their

students within the learning environment, the methods they use for effective learning and their

availability to their students for feedback and support.

 176

SFQ Results. I have grouped the measurement of the Course Management/ The Teacher

criteria based on the percentages of the scores that I have received from my students on my

teaching effectiveness in the ART1021 course I taught during the Spring/ Summer 2017 depicted

in Table 5. Therefore, the SFQ results on the Course Management show that the student

participant either strongly agree or agree with the criteria associated to effective teaching. The

Overall Teaching Effectiveness score of my teaching is 4.7 out of 5 which is higher than the

score of the School at 4.4 and the College at 4.2.

Table 5

Course Management/ The Teacher Scores- SFQ Questionnaire-ART1021-CRN 83477-Spring/

Summer 2017

Course Management/ The Teacher

Scores
Strongly Agree=86% (6 students) Strongly Agree=71% (5 students)
Agree=14% (1 student) Agree=29% (2 students)

Provides information on course outcomes

Conducts the course in a well-organized way
and evaluation methods at the beginning of
the course
Provides helpful comments and feedback
Explains concepts clearly

Treats students with courtesy Helps me to think independently about the

topics in my course
Is available at the times indicated (i.e. as
stated on the course outline, or online, or in-
class, etc.)

Encourages student participation (i.e. by

posing questions, through class discussions
and/or group work, etc.)

Motivation/ To Inspire. According to Biggs and Tang (2007), an appropriate

motivational context plays a key role in student success within a learner-centered teaching and
 177

learning environment. “Learners learn best when they feel free to move, are trusted and are able

to make decisions and take responsibility for their own learning” (p. 92).

From the point of view of the Interested Observer of my study on the learning

environment,

the classroom has a friendly environment. I feel that the interaction between the professor

and the students is friendly, motivational and positive. The background music also gives

a welcoming feeling in the classroom… During the lecture session, some students were

multitasking while listening to the lecture but they were still attending the lecture.

(Saretta Khan)

Students express their appreciation of their teacher’s positive attitude and compassion in

becoming motivated and enjoying their learning. Here are some of my students’ statements

extracted from the SFQs on the impact of the teacher’s good attitude on their experience:

• I always feel relaxed when I study in her class!

• I enjoy the fact that Bahar genuinely cares for her students. It is very rare to find a

teacher who understands where the students are coming form. Her honesty and

encouraging words uplifts students and always creates a safe and stress free

environment.

From the point of view of the learners, the passion that their teachers show about the

material they are teaching has a positive impact in their learning: “Bahar is a great instructor who

is passionate about the subjects she teaches, and most importantly, she truly cares about her

students. Good teacher with lots of passion for the material” (Student Statement).

Another aspect of an appropriate motivational context is the learner’s attitude and

understanding towards the role of the activities that they are asked to complete in order to meet
 178

the intended learning outcomes while taking proud in their own achievement. “The student must

have a reasonable probability of success in achieving the task. Again, this is patently the case in

constructive alignment- if an outcomes is intended, then presumably the teacher has set a task

that is achievable” (Biggs & Tang, p. 92). “I think her projects are fun, really made me feel

proud of the work I was doing” (Student Statement).

Comprehension/ To Inform. According to Biggs and Tang (2007), a well-structured

knowledge base is key to effective teaching.

Building on the known and restructuring sound knowledge is based on

interconnections… [it is about] understanding, deep learning, the growth and

development of knowledge and intrinsic motivation reiterates this… cognitive growth lies

not just in knowing more, but in restructuring what is already known in order to connect

with new knowledge. (pp. 92-93)

The methods that teacher use to develop the course structure and the actions they take to

engage the learners within the transfer of the knowledge plays a key role in the way the students

embrace the flow of information as the receiver of that knowledge and make connection within

the theoretical concepts in a meaningful way. Therefore, changing the traditional way of

lecturing where students are the passive receiver of the information to a scenario where students

are actively engaged in the conversation optimizes the comprehension of the material and

supports students in the conceptualization of the knowledge into theories that will personalize

their application of that knowledge.

From the point of view of the Interested Observer who participated in my study,

the Itten’s theory [of colour contrast] lecture on Power Point was easy to understand,

because it had easy written segments and pictures throughout the Power Point which was
 179

helpful for some students understanding the colour wheel: students are engaged while

Bahar is speaking… Students are answering questions asked by Bahar… I am inspired

from the lecture. (Saretta Khan)

Here are the key points stressed as positive and effective from the observation of the

Critical Expert during the lecture time:

• Having an agenda for the class on the board

• Providing the slides for the students in advance so that they can follow

along/ be prepared in advance

• Relating what you’re teaching to their projects they’ll be working on

• Wonderful paintings/images to support the text/content of what they are learning

• Asking the students questions like: What do you see here? What does it make you

feel? What part of the image creates the…?

• Pacing of the lecture and use of voice – not too fast, not too slow

• Checking in regularly with the students to make sure they are with you/ following

along

• Allowing time for students to ask questions if they want

• Building in the time for students to draw out their own examples of the concepts

you are teaching – this is so great!! (I did it too!)…And you’ve provided them

with small sketch/scribble books to do so!

From the point of view of my students, the teacher’s personal attributes such as being

organized, patient and respectful towards the students in the process of the transfer of the

knowledge help students to make a more effective connection with the content and facilitate deep

learning. Here are some of my students’ statements extracted from the SFQs:
 180

• Provides excellent lectures for classes.

• Clear, organized lectures and assignments, excellent feedback, and always patient

and respectful to her students.

• Your lectures definitely helped me with my other evaluations for other projects.

• All the lectures were fun, I enjoyed the mini sketchbook a lot!

Practice/ To Coach. Formative feedback is an important component of a learning-

centered environment. Biggs and Tang (2007) believe, “arguably the most powerful

enhancement to learning is feedback during learning… telling students how well they are doing

and what might need improving” (p. 97). The Interested Observer of my study noticed that “[I]

give reasonable advices to the students to improve more” (Saretta Khan).

In this respect:

In formative assessment… Students and teachers need to know how learning is

proceeding. Formative feedback may operate both to improve the learning of individual

students and to improve the teaching itself… the effectiveness of different teaching

methods is directly related to their ability to provide formative feedback. (Biggs & Tang,

2007, p. 162)

In an art-based studio environment, giving feedback is deeply ingrained within the

cyclical process of comprehension and practice. In terms of the implementation of formative

feedback in my classroom, the observer of my study stresses out the connection between the

learned knowledge and the application of the knowledge along with the effectiveness of

feedback in creating the learning flow:

In-class work was based on the lecture, some students already knew the knowledge of

colour theory. So It was easy for them to work on the assignments… [The teacher] was
 181

always there if anyone needed help or needed the colour wheel explained again. I saw

one student struggling with the [colour contrast] grid work, but Bahar helped the student

right away. (Student Statement from CIQ)

According to Biggs and Tang (2007), “so important is formative feedback that the

effectiveness of any particular teaching/ learning activity can be judged by how well it provides

feedback to students as they learn” (p. 97).

The Critical Expert of my study points out the importance of encouraging and positive

feedback as an effective teaching method:

You consistently provided the students with positive feedback throughout the class, from

providing supportive comments while they were drawing, giving them praise on their

drawings or when they answered questions correctly, or leading them to the correct

answer in a supportive way.

Here are some of my students’ statements extracted from the SFQs about my availability

to give feedback and encouraging my students to explore their inner creative side:

• Bahar also does a great job at making herself available to students who need extra

help- she is quick to answer emails or schedule meetings when needed and has

done an excellent job teaching me her fundamentals of art.

• Encourages students to explore their own thoughts and ideas, provides us with

opportunities to think outside the box.

One powerful way of learning in an art-based studio environment is to get feedback from

peers. The interaction between students in giving and getting feedback is an effective way of

improving the artwork within the creative process. “The students are very helpful with each other
 182

who needed help. Christiana works very well with students. She knows her material explains the

Itten colour theory [to others] very well (Saretta Khan)”.

Looking at each other’s works within the creative process as well as the final artwork is

very inspiring to the student who participated in my study as stated in their comments on their

response in the CIQ,

• Seeing what Lee had made and sharing our thoughts and ideas was very helpful

(Laura Moore).

• I find it helpful on the project by taking people advice and example on how to do

it. From teacher and student. When they show me their [colour] contrast, I get an

idea and start to work on with the colours by doing painting and colouring.

• In the project what surprises me the most is when people demonstrate their art and

being shocked how beautiful their art is. My mind gets blown from the detail and

the drawing how it’s shown. Comparing mine to theirs (Arts/Design), there is no

competition, it’s just showing our best arts/design.

• I was surprised a lot when the teacher showed some examples of [past] student

[works] and there were very beautiful and that gave me a lot of ideas.

According to Biggs and Tang (2007), “being active while learning is better than being

inactive… such activities should be energetic and memorable in themselves” (pp. 94-95). In my

case study, we had this experience in the process of Project 4 which was a group research

assignment on the Practice of Colour in Art and Design when my students and I went to another

College’s building in the St. James campus to participate in the library workshop for the

individual research that each member of the group needed to complete. Figure 42 (see Appendix

G x) shows our movement in the campus. I invited the Librarian to attend another session for
 183

one-on-one consultation with the students. Here is the statement from the Interested Observer of

my case study who was present in that session:

During the Library workshop in class, not many students at first wanted to chat with [the

Librarian], but eventually the students came along and got help from [the Librarian]. The

Librarian has helped most of the students how to do research just by using the main key

elements (keyword). They emphasized that doing more research will help you find more

keyword for the research. (Saretta Khan)

“Errors are important learning opportunities, but formative feedback is essential in

learning from error. Requiring students to expose their erroneous thinking without risk of

ridicule, loss of face or low grades” (Biggs & Tang, 2007, pp. 98-99). Working with students

with different skills, being patient when they are making mistakes on the topics that have been

explored throughout the class is another attribute of the teacher that students appreciate. “She is

professional and compassionate and really cares about her students regardless of skill level”

(Student Statement on their experience in my classroom).

Application/ To Mentor. Reflective practice and self-monitoring is another

characteristic of rich teaching and learning contexts that value effective teaching. In the context

of studio-based learning, helping students to reflect on their creative practice by thinking about

their process as well as others like their peers and successful practitioners in art and design with

the goal of improvement is another aspect of art and design education. “I just loved how

everyone in the class gets along with the professor. They were talking a lot about future career or

how to become a teacher and other art professions” (Saretta Khan).

Here are some of my student statements extracted form SFQs:

 184

• I had the pleasure to be in Bahar's class, she was always very professional and

patient, and had a great attitude in each of the classes. And she makes her students

feel like artists.

• Excellent teacher with the ability to relate real world applications and challenges

towards students.

The Learning Experience: Course Content

At the College, the learning experience is measured based on the level of understanding

of the students on the course structure and how it connects the Intended Learning Outcomes and

the Teaching/ Learning Tasks, the relevance of the teaching and learning materials, and tools as

well as the way the course and all its components motivate the students to learn more about the

subject matter.

SFQ Results. I have grouped the measurement of the Course Content criteria based on

the percentages of the scores by my students on their learning experience in ART1021 that I

taught during my case study as depicted in Table 6.

Therefore, the SFQ results on the Course Content show that the student participant either

strongly agree or agree with the criteria associated to the effectiveness of the course and its

content. The Overall Learning Experience in the ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory

and Practice course scores at 4.7 out of 5 which is higher than the score of the School and the

College at 4.2.
 185

Table 6

Course Content Scores- SFQ Questionnaire-ART1021-CRN 83477-Spring/ Summer 2017

Course Content
Scores
Strongly Agree=86% (6 students) Strongly Agree=71% (5 students)
Agree=14% (1 student) Agree=29% (2 students)

I understand how the learning activities (e.g.

N/A
lectures, class discussions, assignments,
etc.) are related to the goals of the course

Texts and other materials (e.g. videos,

handouts, readings, online learning tools,
etc.) are informative and help me learn
the course material

Evaluation methods (i.e. assignments,

activities, tests, etc.) help me learn the
course material

This course motivated me to learn more

about the subject

Motivation/ To Inspire. One aspect of the motivational context is that “the task

provided- the teaching/ learning activity itself- must be valued by the student and not seen as

busy-work or trivial” (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 92). Understanding the importance of learning

activities by the students and knowing that those activities will support them in meeting the

objective of the assignment can be a motivational force within the creative process.

These are student statements on the activities that were most engaging throughout the

study that I extracted from their answers of the CIQ survey (see “Critical Incident Questionnaire

Form” in Appendix Bi):

• For the project 1, when I am colouring work I feel engaged because I need to mix

the hue of colours together.

 186

• What I feel about the most engaged is when we explore the colours on the value

to each contrast. By doing a little exercise on the project, we were allowed to mix

the colours up and have a contrast.

• Doing rationale and thumbnails were helpful. Even though I think it’s waste of

time somehow, it’s actually good and helps the project gets better.

• Examples of colour grids and just seeing all the different patterns and grid size

was very useful, as it made me realize I didn’t have to use the same grid format 6

times.

• I enjoyed all of the assignments, I loved doing all of them, class environment was

amazing.

Comprehension/ To Inform. According to Biggs and Tang (2007), one of the important

aspect of motivational context is to maximize the course structure:

connections within the course structure becomes most powerful when they are drawn

vertically or hierarchically… in teaching we should see that the students understand what

the nodes in the structure are… good teaching always contains a structure, hidden away,

but there to be found… the chances of students coming up to grasp the structure can be

maximized in many ways. (pp. 93-94)

One of the students mentions the effectiveness of the alignment of assessment tasks

within the course structure:

At the beginning of this course, I was nervous because I'd always struggled with color

theory in general. After the first assignment, my knowledge increased, and with a couple

figurative weeks left, I feel like I've really learned a lot and improved my knowledge and

understanding of color in general. The assignments are effective at developing

 187

understanding gradually, and I am really happy about the experience. (Student Comment,

SFQ).

One student participant of my study mentions:

How much easier the project was with a colour grid was very surprising. Looking at how

the colour worked with another before putting them down on the actual image made

choosing colours much simpler, as I already knew how they interacted. (Ivan Wong,

CIQ)

Another student states their opinion on how the customized, flexible and active methods

used in my teaching have engaged them in a positive learning experience :

Bahar makes difficult concepts fun and relatable to her students, and always works so

hard to engage her students on their own terms and through their own difficulties and

challenges - she knows there is not a "one size fits all" approach to teaching and I have

always felt like an individual in her classroom, not just another student. (Student

comment, SFQ)

Practice/ To Coach. Biggs and Tang (2007) believe that based on the constructive

alignment of intended learning outcomes and teaching/learning tasks, learning activities that are

used within the Practice stage of the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, p. 78) should be relevant and

tightly related to the theoretical concepts discussed during the Comprehension: “better still is

when the activity addresses specific intended learning outcomes” (pp. 94-95). In this respect, one

of the student participants expresses that “working in class and being able to clarify how to do

something or what our workflow should be” has been effective in their learning. (Student

statement, CIQ)
 188

Another student explains how the creative approach to the process work has been both

enjoyable and a challenging experience:

When I started putting my ideas about the colour scheme together. I enjoyed the process

of picking an image that I could explore. Using the gouache paint and getting the desired

effect of unison strokes and paint coverage on the canvas surprised me. Reproducing my

image on canvas was also challenging. (Christiana Ceballo)

One of my students has mentioned that a speedy grading can motivate students to

improve their work: [the teacher has been] “slow on grading finished work. A bit unnerving for

the eager to excel student” (Student comment, SFQ).

Application/ To Mentor. Some of my students appreciate mentorship on their future

career within the overall goals that they want to reach in their life so they often approach me,

informally, in the classroom and during the studio time or formally by appointment to talk about

their careers in the bigger picture of their life and possible future pathways.

Here are some of the student statements extracted from the College’s SFQ surveys on

their overall learning experience in my classroom and how our informal chats and exchange of

ideas during studio work have inspired them in their learning journey.

• My experience in professor Bahar class will be a very memorable one. She is

exceptionally well informed professional and engaging. Her knowledge of the arts is

impressive. I would definitely attend lectures she is having.

• She has helped me achieve great things in this course despite my having a young

child at home.

• Very informative, felt like she actually cared about our outcome in the class and in

life in our career field.

 189

• I have seen Bahar take a classroom full of scared, un-enthusiastic young students and

in just a few short months turn them into a room of dedicated, engaged, informed

designers-in-the-making. The students' art work has grown by leaps and bounds too.

It's been amazing to see Bahar bring out her class's hidden potential.

A.4- Move in New Direction

In this section, I explain my thoughts on how to improve my teaching practice based on

the synthesis of my learning through my case study and the actions that I as the teacher-

practitioner have taken to live in the direction of my values and the extent to which I have

assessed the rightness of my values against others’ critical responses.

Based on my findings through self-reflection and as well the feedback given by the

Critical Observers and my students, I believe that I can definitely improve different aspects of

my teaching throughout the Cycle of Learning (motivation, comprehension, practice,

application). This can be achieved by using new teaching methods and learning new instructional

tools and technologies to optimize the engagement of my students within the teaching/ learning

environment and create more enjoyable, and memorable learning experience for myself and my

students.

One aspect of my teaching that I have to develop and improve further is the issue of

assessment. According to Biggs and Tang (2007), “summative feedback [which takes place]

after learning, informing how well students have learned what they were supposed to have

learned” (p. 97) closes the learning loop and support students in becoming more confident in

their achievement of the intended learning outcomes.

The constructive feedback on different aspects of my teaching received throughout my

study encourages me to continue implementing those positive aspects in my practice while

 190

thriving in improving the overall planning and teaching in art and design education within an

outcomes-based approach.

Summary of Chapter Four

In this chapter, I answered the following action research questions about my teaching in

the Art and Design Foundation Program at George Brown College School of Design: What did I

do? (actions that I took based on my assumptions), What did I learn? (learning about things that I

do from my own perspective as well as others), and How do I improve the quality of my

practice? (based on synthesis of my findings).

Based on the action research model emerged from my study, first I explained the actions

that I took in my teaching during the Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice that I

taught in the Spring/ Summer semester 2017 at the School of Design. Then, I analyzed my

actions using critical reflexive tools of observation and reflection-in-action/ reflection-on-action

to evaluate my teaching from my own point of view as the insider of the action research study as

well as other participants of my study. To understand other’s point of view on my teaching, I

evaluated the findings collected from the critical observers of my study as outside participants as

well as my own students as the other insider of my study. The research insights from this

evaluation will support me in the improvement of my teaching practice in the years to come.
 Chapter Five – Findings in Phase B: Critical Dialogue with the Institution

In this chapter, I describe my actions and findings in Phase B of my action research study

to develop and implement an outcomes-based curriculum in the Art and Design Foundation

Program (G108). The focus of this phase was my critical dialogue with the institution in my role

as the Academic Coordinator of the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) at George

Brown College (GBC) School of Design (SoD). While the main purpose of this phase of my

study was to improve my practice in the development of the curriculum by actively engaging my

colleagues in the process, I also explored the formation of a dialogue-based platform about

teaching and curriculum development using the emerging action-research tools from my study.

In Phase one of this study, I sought to answer the first two research questions: 1) How do I

develop and implement an outcomes-based curriculum? and 2) How do I improve the quality of

my praxis? In this phase I focus on research question three; 3) How do I contribute to the

implementation of outcomes-based education in the institution?

Phase B: Method/ Scope/ Context/ Participants

In this phase, I collected data from my interactions and critical conversation with seven

faculty members who were teaching in the Art and Design Foundation Program at the School of

Design (Table 7) during the time of my study, and one critical administrator at the College. All

faculty members who participated in my research consented to the audio recording of the

meetings, to be photographed in the group discussion and to be identified by name in the

reporting of the findings. The Critical Administrator consented to the audio-recording of the

interview (See “Informed Consent – Critical Administrator” in Appendix E).

191
 192

Table 7

Name and Teaching Status of the Faculty Participants- 2017-2019 (with their written consent)

Name Teaching Status

Doug Darrah Full-time
Edda Dolcetti Part-time
Jennifer Foote Part-time
Derek Liddington Part-time
Helen Marioncu Part-time
Sabrina Russo Part-time
Sheeraz Wania Part-time

The research phase of my study spanned from the Fall semester 2017 to the end of the

Fall semester 2019. During this phase, first I had individual conversations with the faculty

participants and took field notes during the meetings. I also asked participants to complete the

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges (SWOC) table (see “SWOC Analysis

Questionnaire” in Appendix Fi) that I provided to them digitally before the meeting and as well

in the meeting as a hard copy. Edda Dolcetti who has been teaching the ART1021 Foundation

Colour (the old name for Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice) and had contributed

in the development of this course in previous years, shared with me her own teaching documents

including course outline, project sheets and rubrics.

I met with faculty participants in August 2019 for a Reflection Group meeting (see

“Figures 43 & 44” in Appendix G x) and discussed the implementation of outcomes-based

education in their teaching practice using the activity worksheet that I had digitally provided in

my invitation to the meeting and distributed in the beginning of this focus group meeting to

guide our conversation (see “Guide for Reflection Group Discussion” in Appendix F ii). The

activity includes six parts for a total of one hour to discuss the Strengths, Opportunities,

Aspirations and Results (SOAR Analysis) in teaching within the program. The final part of the
 193

activity is a reflection on the changes that we made as a team throughout years (2016-2019) and

the challenges that we faced in this respect. With the written consent of all the participants I

audio-recorded our discussion, while taking field notes during the discussion. Lastly, I

interviewed a Critical Administrator at the College in March 2019 and took field notes from the

main points of the conversation during the meeting based on the interview questions that I had

previously send by email at the time of invitation (see “Guide for Administrator Interview” in

Appendix Ei).

Action Research Model for Phase B

Figure 1 (see p. 74) depicts the three stages of the action research cycle I undertook in

Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self as well as in Phase B - Critical Dialogue with the

Institution.

In Phase B.1- Action, I outline the actions that I have taken in the curriculum

development activities of the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) from the academic

year 2014-2015 to the academic year 2019-2020 and in different capacities at the School of

Design. This section includes the projects initiated by the School of Design or the College in my

capacity as a part-time faculty (first half of the academic year 2014-2015), the activities that I

have inititated as the Acting Chair at the School of Design (June-December 2015) and in

collaboration with the Acting Academic Corrdinator of G108, and later, under the supervision of

the Chair and in collaboration with my colleagues in the G108 program (2016-2020) in my role

as the Academic Coordinator of the program.

The Phase B.2- Research section comprises the research activities that I undertook in

Phase B of my study as the Academic Coordinator of the G108 program. For this phase of my

study, I used qualitative tools such as informal conversations and meetings with my colleagues,
 194

conversation with the critical administor at the College, document and photograph analyses,

SWOC and SOAR analyses.

In the Phase B.3- Evaluation section, I included the outsider view of the research

participants of Phase B on the Actions that I undertook in the development of the G108

curriculum as the Academic Coordinator of the program. Phase B.4- Move to a New Direction is

the outline of the new actions that I proposed to take, based on the insights I gleaned in my

Research completed in Phase B of my study. The final section of Chapter Five is a summary of

my insights from my action-research study in Phase B.

Phase B.1- Action

Study Background for Phase B

This section is the timeline of my professional practice at the School of Design and its

parallel trajectory alongside my PhD research journey at the OISE, University of Toronto. At the

time of the approval of my PhD proposal in April 2015, I was a partial-load faculty member

teaching several courses since 2008 in the Design Management, and Art and Design Foundation

programs at George Brown College School of Design.

My initial plan was to conduct an action-research study with an outcomes-based approach

in one of the courses that I was teaching at the School of Design. Then, my research direction

took a different path due to the new responsibilities that I was assigned to perform as the Acting

Chair at the School of Design from June-December 2015. While the new administrative role

seemed to interfere with my PhD research goals and plans, it provided me with new experiences

on the development and implementation of outcomes-based education that later supported me in

the completion of my action-research study and as well, the improvement of my practice.

 195

I was initially invited to assume the role of Academic Coordinator of the G108 program

but then I was asked to temporarily take on the role of Acting Chair at the School of Design as

the Chair at the time took a short sabbatical to work on their own PhD research. Therefore, my

colleague, Doug Darrah supported the curriculum development initiatives as the Acting

Academic Coordinator of the G108 program. I decided to postpone my PhD research during this

brief administrative role at the School of Design (June-December 2015) but was proactively

involved in all aspects of curriculum development and improvement across the programs at the

School of Design.

Being the Acting Chair at the School made me aware of the intertwined paradigms of

teaching and administration. While both teachers and administrators were working towards the

same goal, which is to provide students with a better quality of learning experience, they were

using different lenses to tackle similar challenges in the teaching-learning environment. As an

administrator, I realized that I was able to gain a better grasp of administrative procedures and

projects due to my teaching experience, while the administrative experience made me ready to

take on the role of Academic Coordinator more effectively.

Actions: Timetable and Initiatives

Academic Year 2015-2016

Program Quality Self-Audit (as Faculty Member). In May 2015, I participated in

faculty meetings and curriculum improvement discussions and brainstorming activities initiated

by the Chair and organized by the outgoing Academic Coordinator of the G108 program based

on a Program Quality Self-Audit (PQSA) that had taken place in 2014. The Academic

Coordinator at the time had sent the results of the self-audit review to the faculty prior to the

meeting. As a part-time faculty member, I was not asked to be involved in the PQSA process so
 196

at that time, my first thought was to bring all the stakeholders including part-time faculty to the

table from the start of curriculum activities and give voice to faculty in the decision-making

process once I took on the role of Academic Coordinator.

I took detailed notes during the meetings and activities, and was an active participant in

the group discussions. Here are the highlights of my reflection questions that emerged

throughout the meetings and the ideas that I shared with my colleagues:

• Reflection questions: How do we improve the user experience? How do we

improve the retention from semester one to semester two? How do we create a

unique foundation design experience? What should be the outcomes of the

program?

• Ideas: Increase student agency, create a holistic user experience, foster

exploration and experimentation, create a unique experience in collaboration with

the professional community, enhance customized learning and flexible platforms

in terms of project choices, subject matter/ content, scheduling and the format of

the classes, optimize project/ course alignment and flow, and bring incremental

change to the program.

Program Vocational Learning Outcomes and Course Description Review. As the

Acting Chair and with the support of Doug Darrah, the Acting Program Coordinator of the G108

program, I initiated and collaborated with a Curriculum Specialist at the College to redefine the

Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) which are statements that demonstrate student’s abilities on

completion of the program (Lennon, 2010). Table 3 (see p. 125) depicts the previous program

learning outcomes as well as the new outcomes developed in 2016 while Table 8 shows the

program description update in 2016.

 197

Table 8

Comparative Program Vocational Learning Outcomes Pre-existing (2008) and Latest (2016)

Pre-existing (2008) Developed in 2016

1. Create two and three-dimensional designs 1. Create two- and three-dimensional art and
using a wide range of materials, processes and design works using art elements, principles of
techniques. design, and a wide range of materials,
processes and techniques.
2. Use the design process to develop and 2. Solve design problems and develop
solve visual problems using various strategies creative form using a research-based design
for idea generation. process.
3. Apply the formal elements and principles 3. Develop and present a portfolio that
of design. showcases personal artistic style using a range
of media appropriate for a variety of venues.
4. Utilize a variety of presentation skills 4. Identify the elements of art, principles of
across a wide range of media appropriate to design, tools, methods and techniques that
portfolios, public and private venues. artists and designers use to create
meaning within a global context.
5. Develop skills in portfolio presentation in a 5. Communicate in an art and design
variety of media through studio based environment using appropriate language,
projects. strategies and techniques in order to develop
and maintain interpersonal relationships and
participate in a peer evaluation process.
6. Articulate art concepts, history and the role 6. Develop a unique personal visual identity
of art in society to the general public. using analog and digital materials, tools,
techniques and environments.
7. Manage personal digital presence/brand by
participating in professional communities of
practice.

Source: As approved by Credential Validation Service (CVS) on 14 March 2016.

Table 9 depicts G108 Program Description Update- Academic Year 2016-2017.

 198

Table 9

G108 Program Description Update- Academic Year 2016-2017

Old Program Description Updated Program Description

Art and Design Foundation is a one-year Art and Design Foundation is a one-year
certificate program that provides students certificate program that provides students
with a broad base of experience and with a broad base of experience and
knowledge of art and design. Through studio- knowledge of art and design. Students gain
based projects students develop a portfolio of practical and critical skills and learn the
work spanning a range of media. This terminology, tools, methods and techniques of
program is suitable for students wanting to art and design to explore further education
apply for more advanced art and design and future career path in this field. Courses in
programs at George Brown College and other this program include foundation of drawing,
institutions, or to seek entry-level materials, colour theory, photography, digital
employment opportunities requiring design, digital storytelling, design process and
fundamental visual arts skills such as gallery art history. The art and design showcase
attendant, art supply store assistant and artist lecture series introduces students to creative
assistant. industry partners and art and design
practitioners. Through studio-based projects
students develop a portfolio of work spanning
a range of media. This program is suitable
for students who wish to pursue advanced art
and design programs at George Brown
College and other institutions, or to seek
entry-level employment opportunities
requiring fundamental visual arts skills such
as gallery attendant, art supply store assistant
and artist assistant.

Source: Updated Program Description as approved by Credential Validation Service (CVS) on

14 March 2016.

Key Changes. The following are the changes to the program learning outcomes in 2016

compared with 2014:

• Use of critical key words: research-based design process, meaning within global

context, interpersonal relationship, peer evaluation process,

• Integration of learning outcomes,

 199

• Introduction of new learning outcomes.

Course Name Changes. I initiated more descriptive names for some courses.

Curriculum Development. Based on the competitor analysis, faculty insights and student

feedback, I initiated new courses and electives for the 2nd semester toward new pathways, that

are Painting and Mixed-Media Studio, Advanced Digital Media, Photography: People, Concepts

and Stories.

Retention Project. In collaboration with a researcher, the Chair and the G108 program

faculty and students, we collected data and compiled an Internal Report for the Office of

Academic Excellence at George Brown College. The highlights of the study were then shared

with the faculty during our annual meeting for discussion and further curriculum improvement.

Here are the retention project findings identified in the Internal Report: (Mousavi Hejazi,

2016, pp. 1-2)

A. Supportive Personal Connections

• Increase peer-to-peer connection: Organized collaborative study groups.

• Increase student-faculty connections: Organized Portfolio Clinic to engage

students and faculty in an informal discussion and exchange of ideas.

B. Welcoming Students Spaces

• Intentional space arrangements to increase student-to-student and student-to-

faculty interactions and connections: Peer collaboration and student engagements

within both physical (Collab-a-Lab initiative) and digital environments (Open

Network, Wikis and Behance).

C. Student-Centered Policies and Processes

 200

• Flexible policies and processes: Established ongoing conversation with faculty on

the quality of teaching and learning by holding regular course-based meetings and

faculty meetings to share best practices, discuss the progress of the students and

review alignments and improvement of the courses.

D. Engaging Academic Learning

• Active learning: Launched the iPad initiative in the new Multimedia Storytelling

course in Winter 2016 lead by Professor Jim Kinney, with the support of the

Chair, Dr. Elise Hodson and in collaboration with the e-Learning and Teaching

Innovation Office.

• Student-centered approaches: Increased student interaction in the classroom

through peer-feedback and group discussions; review of assessment tools such as

formative and summative evaluation tools in alignment with course learning

outcomes, assessment tasks and teaching and learning activities.

E. Purposeful curriculum design and delivery:

• Reviewed Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) in collaboration with the Office of

Academic Excellence;

• Reviewed the curriculum with a focus on ‘Portfolio Making’ and ‘Self-

Identity/Personal Visual Branding’ as the most important deliverables of this

program;

• Changed names and contents of three courses to reflect the new needs of the

program in the digital age;

• Reviewed course outlines to create more flow and alignment between courses and

projects;
 201

• Added research skills and critical thinking components to the projects;

• Reviewed the art kit components and the price of the textbook sold in GBC’s

bookstore to make the required materials more affordable and accessible for

students;

• Institutional buy of the Art Fundamentals e-textbook (Ocvirk et. al, 2012) in

collaboration with the e-Learning and Teaching Innovation Office.

F. High Impact Student Services

• Offering support, resources and skill-building opportunities to students who lack

information and academic preparedness:

• Supported course-based English writing such as rationales, self-reflection, formal

analysis, design brief and research essay by hiring English tutor at the School of

Design;

• Developed a close relationship with GBC’s Library on course-based/project-based

support, copyright and plagiarism;

• Increased collaboration with Disability and Counselling services in order to

discuss the specific needs of our faculty and students within a studio-based

learning environment and optimized the existing support system for students at-

risk.

• Support to select an appropriate career, develop time management and study

skills: Reviewed and developed project components that enhance Essential

Employability Skills (EESs) such as time management, self-management,

interpersonal and communication skills, teamwork and engagement in reflective

practices.
 202

• Support to develop reading, writing and language skills: Collaborated with the

School of Communication at GBC to discuss and identify the needs of our

students in terms of English proficiency related to the field of art and design.

G. Student Involvement & Engagement

• Encouraged student participation and active learning through interactions with

faculty and peers, and extra-curricular activities and jobs:

• Created social and course-based events such as program-specific orientation, mid-

term gathering, ‘Behance’ night and ‘Portfolio Clinic’ to engage students, faculty

and staff in discussing important topics such as Program Learning Outcomes,

student success initiatives, course content, future pathways and overall services

offered at the School of Design and George Brown College;

• Collaborated with clients (inside such as GBC’s bookstore and outside such as

Toronto Community Foundation; Daniel’s Centre) in course-based real life

projects such as School of Design Chair’s Competition;

• Invited guest lecturers such as industry leaders, successful graduates and

motivational speakers in courses such as Art Showcase (Old name of Art and

Design Portfolio Showcase).

Academic Year 2017-2018

Curriculum Improvement. This section is an overview of the activities that I undertook

with the collaboration of faculty and based on the insights emerged from both faculty and

students for the improvement of the G108 curriculum during the academic year 2017-2018.
 203

Collaboration with Faculty. I initiated working sessions with faculty and the Chair for

the development of integrated and cross-course projects. I used the following collaboration

strategies to engage my colleagues in the process of curriculum development and improvement:

• One-on-one meetings with faculty to develop new courses or review and update

existing courses;

• Course-based working group meetings to discuss curriculum, projects and/or

students; informal face-to-face chats, communication by phone on urgent matters

such as student issues or challenges;

• Monthly faculty meetings to discuss the semester, students and events, and share

ideas, tools and resources;

• Annual general meetings that occur often in May-June to review the year’s

highlights and activities, review internal students’ exit survey results and Key

Performance Indicators (KPI) and exchange ideas on improvement, and further

actions;

• Communication through email about issues or catching up with latest news or

college activities.

Feedback from Students. In addition to informal conversations with my students

throughout the semester in the studio/ working sessions in the classroom, I gathered vital

information about students through student surveys in the beginning of the program by asking

about their background, their plans on future pathways and their future aspirations (see “About

Me Questionnaire” in Appendix G vii) and as well at the end of the program by asking questions

about their learning experience both positive and challenging as well as their overall experience

in the program (see “End of the Year Questionnaire” in Appendix H).

 204

Each year in our annual program meeting, I shared the highlights of the yearly surveys

with my colleagues and discussed the results in small course-based working groups with the goal

of course and curriculum review and planning.

Academic Year 2018-2019

Implementation of New Courses. I co-developed new OBE informed courses and

maintained constant review and working sessions with faculty.

Collaboration with the Librarian Liaison at the School of Design. In collaboration with

the Librarian Liaison at the School of Design, we developed a holistic approach in bringing

research knowledge and skills across courses and projects in the program from the first semester

to the second semester. This effort took place in alignment with the new program learning

outcomes that addressed the importance of research skills as crucial competencies in art and

design practice.

Academic Year 2019-2020

Internal Curriculum Review. I worked and am still collaborating with faculty in course

review and curriculum improvement with the goal of enhancing the focus on outcomes based

education (OBE).

College Annual Program Review. I collaborated with the program reviewer from the

Office of Academic Excellence in the College Annual Review that took place in the academic

year 2019-2020. I participated in a faculty meeting to discuss the program review process and

shared documents and information about the G108 program curriculum and outcomes-based

initiatives that we had undertook in curriculum improvement such as the review of the program

learning outcomes based on competitor analysis, the new demands of creative-based industry and

educational pathways from our program to other programs at the School of Design. I supported
 205

the reviewer’s effort to increase student and faculty surveys response and engagement in the

review process, and finally completed the review survey.

Phase B.2- Research

This section is the analysis of the findings collected from my one-on-one interviews with

my colleagues who were teaching in the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) at the time

of my study and participated in my research (2017-2020). All the faculty who are named in this

section have provided their written consent to be named in the report of my study.

Effectiveness of The Curriculum: Course Management Across Curriculum With an OBE

Approach

This section highlights the strengths of the Art and Design Foundation (G108) curriculum

from the point of view of the faculty participants and other stakeholders of my study in regard to

curriculum effectiveness and course management with an outcomes-based approach.

Strengths. The following statements are an overview of the opinion of the participants of

my study in Phase B on what makes our program strong in terms of meeting the course outcomes

as well as program learning outcomes and objectives within individual courses and overall

course structures and planning in G108.

Instructors [in this program] that have years of Industry expertise suggest curriculum

content and design projects to align with the changing needs of the Design Industry,

Technology and Culture, and Customers. They bring unique, Creative Skills based on

their expertise and from an Applied perspective – solving design problems with creative

solutions for their clients.

 206

The suggested Collaboration model for idea exchange and Best Practices is

backed with actual expertise, and can be an ongoing resource to validate methods and

processes to meet changing Industry dynamics. (Edda Dolcetti)

The strengths of program come from our dedicated and professional faculty team with a

collective vision who care about what we do and collaborate to make change happens.

(Doug Darrah)

The new curriculum has a flexible structure: sharing of the curriculum between sections,

benefit of learning-centered methods and in-class exercises in student’s learning

experience and satisfaction. The improved curriculum has a more cohesive structure.

(Helen Marioncu)

One of the strengths of our program is the flexibility of the curriculum: students having

more choices in terms of projects and their future career paths. (Jennifer Foote)

The caliber of assignments improved as students learned to leverage the resources

available to them, and in turn, this deepened their understanding of the value of research

and the importance of developing research skills. (Corinne Abba, Liaison Librarian)

Art and Design Foundation Program caters to students with different interests who are

willing to explore new opportunities in the field of art and design education. (Sheeraz

Wania)

Teaching and Learning Experience in a Learning-Centered Environment

This section is an overview of the strengths of the Art and Design Foundation (G108)

curriculum from the point of view of the faculty participant of my study in terms of teaching/

learning experience, active learning, the constructive alignment of intended learning outcomes,
 207

teaching/ learning activities and assessment tasks, peer feedback, formative feedback and self-

critique within the Learning Cycle (Figure 5, P. 78).

Creating trust through efficient communications… Showing mutual respect and

trust…Ignite students curiosity and imagination… Bull is bold and wild and powerful.

We have to realize its power and harness it. (Doug Darrah)

One such example [of idea exchange with Bahar] was allowing students time in class and

after critique to ‘finalize’ and ‘complete’ their projects based on feedback. This allowed

feedback an opportunity to enter into practice - perhaps elevating my own expectations of

‘finished’ and ‘complete’, replacing it with the notion that work is always in progress and

a means of further learning. This disruption of ‘completion’ worked amazingly well with

GBC students and seemed to elevate much of the stress of having the work ‘finished’ for

class critique. It also gave students the opportunity to apply the new ‘knowledge’

gathered from the critique process in real time… The idea of learning from my students,

changing things and improving my teaching is essential in my view of a learning-

centered environment. (Derek Liddington)

And, Sheeraz Wania said,

How can we measure creativity? Art is subjective of what we think, so we should instead

measure the creative process. Not taking things at face value. Explain the concept and

justify their final design. Whatever they do should fall in the parameters of the project.

Creativity has also parameters.

Phase B.3 - Evaluation

My Own View
 208

The ideology critique tool proposed by Brookfield (1995) inspired me to examine some

of the critical topics emerged from Phase B.2- Research of my study. In this section, I discuss my

view on the implementation of outcomes-based education in curriculum development and

improvement of the Art and Design Foundation Program at George Brown College School of

Design in comparison with some dominant views emerged from my one-on-one conversation

with the faculty participant of my study. My goal is to highlight the different perception of the

faculty who are teaching in our program about the implementation of OBE in the planning of

studio-based teaching and learning experience.

Critical Topic. What is are the role of outcomes-based education? How does OBE

impact curriculum planning and teaching in art and design and creative-based programs?

Dominant View. Curriculum development at George Brown College follows outcomes-

based guidelines and learning-centered policies across its department for the purpose of quality

assurance and quality review practiced at Ontario Colleges, in alignment with efficient

mechanisms established by Ontario College Quality Assurance Service (OCQAS) such as

Program Quality Assurance Process Audit (PQAPA) and Credentials Validation Service (CVS)

consistent with the Minister of Training, Colleges and University (MTCU)’s Binding Policy

Directive, Framework for Programs of instruction (Honsberger, 2014). According to Honsberger,

[CVS] follows an outcomes-based credentialing model which guarantees that colleges

work to educate students in full accordance with pre-established outcomes required for

each certificate, diploma and degree. The Credentials Framework represents the

minimum provincial requirement for credentials to be awarded and applies to all

programs of instruction, regardless of funding source. Outcomes are established through

 209

rigorous consultations and cooperation between the Ministry of Training, Colleges and

Universities, industry, the colleges and our organization. (p. 3)

Faculty who are teaching at the College follow those OBE policies and guidelines

established by MTCU in their course planning and teaching practice. However, different ideas

about the role of OBE emerged from my conversations with my peers during my study. While all

faculty have fully adhered to the policies and guidelines practiced at the college, some expressed

different opinions about the application of OBE in art and design education.

One topic of interest was based on the perception of OBE having a structure that

constrains teaching within a creative curriculum. Teachers discussed their fear to be undervalued

or become obsolete through time because of a course structure that is more focused on objectives

and outcomes of the course rather than the transfer of practical skills of the artist-educator in a

studio-based teaching/ learning environment, a structure that is easily transferable from teacher

to teacher and does not give real value to the know-how of the faculty which some believe may

make part-time faculty easily replaceable.

Another concept that emerged from my conversation with faculty was their real concern

about the managerial view of the implementation of the outcomes-based approach in education

which defines the emergence and practice of OBE as the result of “neo-conservative belief that

education is a private good and therefore one should pay for it… [and] demands a new

modularized credit-based curriculum, accountability and quality assurance” (Biggs & Tang,

2007, pp. 2-3).

Some of the faculty believe that the market-driven view of OBE has created a mindset of

customer service where teachers are seen as service providers and students as their clients. In this

paradigm, some educators are still functioning in the traditional teacher-centered paradigm that
 210

view the students as being completely responsible for their own learning while some students are

passively expecting that their teachers provide them with successful results in return on their

financial investment in their education.

In this respect, the Teaching and Learning Exchange (TLX) at George Brown College

provide professional practice on learning-centered practices at the College to support faculty in

their transformational journey and continued growth. According to the GBC website (2021):

The TLX exists to foster a culture of exemplary teaching and learning, from in-class to

hybrid to fully online, through coordinated services and combined resources supporting

the entire college community. We support:

• a holistic approach for college-wide professional development regarding teaching

and learning

• innovation and creativity that encourages continual improvement

• dissemination of innovative practices

At the TLX, we offer both physical and virtual spaces where we can gather to

collaborate, share, create and learn together. Efforts are aimed at helping our college

community to thrive and grow so we can provide a quality learner experience.

(https://www.georgebrown.ca/faculty/teaching-and-learning-exchange)

My View. Coming from a teaching-centered environment- mostly at university level- as

both a learner and a teacher, and my training in the College Teacher Training Program (CTTP) at

George Brown College in 2008 which led me to learn about OBE and practice its learning-

centered principles in my teaching have equipped me with a functional understanding of the

existing and sometime opposite views on the changing nature of teaching/ learning in an

outcomes-based paradigm that places learning at the heart of teaching.

 211

Therefore, I believe that the mutual expectations that are shaped by the market-driven

view of OBE are often causing the misconception of the role of the OBE from both teachers and

learners, and work against the spirit of good teaching and learning which is based on respect,

reciprocity and the promotion of active learning, and in some instances, is the basis of many

misunderstandings and issues that may happen in the daily operations within the classroom and

beyond.

Despite the abundant and rich professional services and resources offered by the TLX at

the College and encouragement from the administration at the School of Design, some of my

part-time colleagues who are also working in the industry or have their own businesses are not

willing or not able to use those services and resources throughout the year.

While the voluntary nature of professional development at the College supports those

faculty who have intrinsic motivation to learn and develop their teaching practice, despite some

of the challenges they face in balancing their workload and their life, the lack of extrinsic factors

and incentives such as financial support and/ or other ways of rewarding professional

development have been mentioned, particularly by some of my part-time colleagues who form

the majority of the teaching body in G108, as the main reason for their lack of interest and

enthusiasm to participate in those initiatives.

In addition to accountability, transparency and transferability, OBE provides educational

organizations with the opportunity to adapt their strategic mandates with the changing needs of

the marketplace due to technological and social disruptions in the 21st century that require

different skill sets to solve global and local problems and find new opportunities in the field of

art and design (Justice, 2019).

 212

According to new research from [the Royal Bank of Canada] RBC Economics… Canada

is on the brink of a skills revolution… More than one-quarter of Canadian jobs will be

heavily disrupted by technology in the decade ahead… Jobs will remain; they’ll just

require different skills… Our research shows a growing demand for what are known as

soft or foundational skills. We prefer to call them human skills, the ones that tend to

separate good from great in every walk of life. Critical thinking and creativity,

communication and collaboration- these will be the standout skills in the age of advanced

technology. People who work well with technology and work well with people- that can

be the Canadian difference. (McKay, 2017, p.1)

I believe that the OBE approach which defines vocational learning outcomes based on the

required competencies needed in the ever-changing knowledge-based economy and supports

educational institutions to train students to become successful after graduation, provides

educators with flexible structures that in addition to aiming to achieve the outcomes and reach

results, value the know-how of practitioner- educator in their field of expertise.

I believe in adaptive and innovative strategies that would support the gradual integration

of educators within an OBE infrastructure through a bottom-up reculturing that would bring

change in a deep and meaningful way, thus “change cannot be ‘managed’ (controlled). It can be

understood and perhaps led” (Fullan, 2004, p. 43).

Critical Topic. How can we implement the learning-centered principles of OBE in the

field of art and design education?

Dominant View. During my conversation with faculty who are teaching in the Art and

Design Foundation Program, we discussed the different aspects of the implementation of OBE

such as the effectiveness of the curriculum and course management across curriculum as well as
 213

the teaching and learning experience in a learning-centered environment from their personal

point of view as highlighted in Phase B.2- Research. Therefore, some reflective questions arose

from those discussions such as: What are the expectations of teachers and learners in their

adaptation to the learner-centered paradigm? How can we manage those expectations? What kind

of leadership is needed in both the macro (curriculum development) and micro (course

development) levels?

My View. In continuation of the views discussed on the previous critical topic, I believe

in systematic and incremental but significant and deep change that comes from within the

institution versus a radical and superficial change that is brought upon from outside forces. This

type of deep incremental change needs strategic planning and a genuine belief that real and

lasting change only happens through time by collaborative effort with collective goals that foster

trust and celebrate the culture of sharing and support. According to Fullan (2004), “in

collaborative cultures, sharing and support create trust, feelings of collegiality and

professionalism, greater capability, and continual improvement” (p. 120). Incremental change

starts with changing the context which means

changing the conditions under which people operate. This includes naming knowledge

sharing as a value, creating mechanisms to enable it, and reinforcing it when it occurs.

Here are some ways to create the conditions and processes that enhance the likelihood of

greater ownership and commitment:

i. Start with moral purpose, key problems, and desirable directions – but don’t lock in;

allow room for exploration and contribution.

ii. Create communities of interaction around these ideas.

iii. Ensure that quality information infuses interaction and related deliberations.
 214

iv. Look for promising patterns; consolidate gains and build on them. (p. 120)

The transition from the 20th Century mass produced educational infrastructures to

changes that are brought upon in the 21st century due to fast-paced disruptions caused by

technological advances, digitization and mass customization needs the implementation of a new

worldview. As stated by Covey, “the new Knowledge Worker Age is based on a new paradigm,

one entirely different than the thing paradigm of the Industrial Age. Let’s call it the Whole-

Person Paradigm” (Covey, 2004, p. 20).

In this new paradigm, leadership of change can be defined based on:

• Moral purpose (making a positive difference)

• Understanding change (innovation is not change; there will be an implementation

dip; resistance is a potential positive force; reculturing is required; change is

complex)

• Relationship building (among diverse people)

• Knowledge creating and sharing (information becomes knowledge through a

social process)

• Coherence making (integrating, focusing amid complexity)

• Energy, enthusiasm, hope (Fullan, 2004, pp. 8-9)

Effective leaders who are the agents of change in institutions- no matter their position or

their ranks- empower people to express their opinion without restrains, show compassion and

empathy, and value other’s ideas in their decision-making process by tapping into

the higher reaches of human genius and motivation – what we could call voice… [a]

unique personal significance – significance that is revealed as we face our greatest

challenges and that makes us equal to them… Leadership in the Knowledge Worker Age
 215

will be characterized by those who find their own voice and who, regardless of formal

position, inspire others to find their voice. It is leadership when people communicate to

others their worth and potential so clearly they will come to see it in themselves. Therein

lies a bright and limitless future. (Covey, 2006, pp. 224-225)

Others’ View

This section highlights the views of the faculty who participated in the Reflection Group

meeting as insider participants of my study after our one-on-one interviews that took place in the

beginning of my study from 2017-2019. Per my request, the former Chair at the School of

Design (2013-2018) and the Librarian Liaison who has been and still is working at the College

provided me with a written statement on my collaboration with them as outsider collaborators

during the action phase of my study (2017-2020) and agreed to be named in my dissertation.

These views express the significance of the action that I have taken in my role as the

Academic Coordinator of the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) and as the

practitioner-researcher of this study (2017-2020), in collaboration with the faculty participants as

well as other stakeholders at the School of Design and the College who were involved in the

G108 curriculum development and improvement. All the people who are named in this section of

my dissertation have granted their written permission to be named in this report.

Curriculum Development and Improvement Based on the Principles of Outcomes-

Based Education. College’s learning-centered policies and guidelines created a platform that

guided the G108 team in the development of curriculum in the Art and Design Foundation

Program during my action research study. Here are the highlights of the significance of our

mutual collaboration in this process.

 216

Mapping Learning Outcomes in Collaboration with Faculty Members and other

Stakeholders (Administration and Librarian). In collaboration with faculty and with the support

of the administration at the School of design and GBC’s Office of Academic Excellence, we

mapped out the course outcomes in alignment with the learning outcomes in several sessions and

phases explained in Phase B.1- Action.

Professor Doug Darrah is one of my colleagues who has been a great support to me in my

integration as a part-time faculty at the School of Design since 2008 and had a significant role in

the process of curriculum development and improvement, and in bringing about the needed

change into our program. Doug is a full-time faculty member at the School of Design who has

been successfully teaching in the Art and Design Foundation, and Graphic Design Programs in

the past 20 years while working within the creative industry as a graphic design consultant. Doug

is a member of the Association of Registered Graphic Designers (RGD).

The following statement is Doug’s view on the significance of our collaboration in the

mapping of the learning outcomes:

The changes in the Art & Design Foundation Program at George Brown College in the

past five years (2015-2020) have been dramatic under the guidance and coordination of

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi. Bahar has done a comprehensive and thorough analysis of the

learning outcomes of the 12 courses in this 1-year program. (Doug Darrah)

Since 2008 and throughout years, the Librarian Liaison at the School of Design, Corinne

Abba has closely and significantly collaborated with me in the gradual and effective integration

of the College’s vast library resources, research guidelines and policies practiced at GBC into the

Art and Design Foundation curriculum. This is Corinne’s statement on the significance of the

introduction of GBC’s research capabilities into the G108 curriculum:

 217

Bahar’s expertise in design, and her firm belief that research will become even more

relevant in the field going forward, spearheaded excellent initiatives to support student

research using the library. Her holistic approach to learning continues to serve as

inspiration for our collaborative efforts. (Corinne Abba, the Liaison Librarian)

Meeting Program Learning Outcomes Emerged From Research on Student Needs in

Program (Adding Fine Arts Courses in the Program). As mentioned in Phase B.1- Action, after

conducting the Retention Research project and competitive analysis under the supervision of the

Chair at the School of Design, Dr. Elise Hodson, Doug and I developed new program learning

outcomes and reviewed the old outcomes in accordance with the results of curriculum mapping

and research results. These led to the emergence of new electives courses that were approved by

the administration and that I co-developed with the support and collaboration of G108 faculty.

In the academic year 2017-2018, Professor Derek Liddington joined me in developing the

Painting and Mixed-Media Studio course. Derek who has been teaching at the Department of

Drawing and Painting, OCAD University as a sessional instructor since 2011 is a professional

artist and curator working in Toronto, Ontario. Derek is currently teaching at the School of

Design as a part-time faculty. “The course came out of a need, by students, for my hands-on

studio learning in techniques of painting, drawing, collage and mixed media approaches that

would support both fine art and design based entrance portfolios” (Derek Liddington).

Curriculum Planning: Constructive Alignment of Intended Learning Outcome,

Teaching/ Learning Activities and Assessment Tasks Across Courses and Projects in a Studio-

Based Environment. “From the ground up, Bahar has made the program more robust and

integrated by aligning and updating student projects and jettisoning duplicate projects and

activities making the student experience more effective and efficient,” said Doug Darrah.
 218

Here is Derek’s statement about our collaboration in co-developing the new Painting and

Mixed-Media Studio elective course that he has been teaching since Winter 2018 in G108:

In a practical sense our working tighter setup a curriculum that was ideation based and

gave students a ‘building block’ approach to studio learning. With each week leading into

one another and offering in class opportunities to make and out of class moments of self-

discovery. Perhaps most important was that Bahar and I learned from each other’s

strengths (in teaching and making) as well as our own bias (to student capacity and

skills). This type of pedagogical learning (on my part) would not have been possible

without the continued conversation and course development with Bahar over several

iterations of the course. (Derek Liddington)

Course Content. In terms of course content and assignment development within the

related courses, Corinne Abba, Liaison Librarian explained,

We started by focusing on course content, and finding opportunities to integrate the

library and its resources into research assignments and deliverables. We were (and

continue to be) open to trying new things, finding what worked, analyzing what didn’t,

and refining the process accordingly.

Collaboration Within a Learning-Centered Educational Environment. Mutual

exchange and collaboration based on shared interests, expertise, passion, positive attitude and

our belief in good teaching are the crucial factors that contributed to the successful outcomes of

our team in achieving our goals in a learning-centered curriculum development and

improvement.
 219

Mutual Collaboration Based on Exchange of Expertise and Experience in Art And

Design Education. Being open to new solutions and listening to each other’s ideas supported our

team to successfully meet our common goals in curriculum development.

Over the past three years Bahar has worked with me on a collaborative level to develop

Painting and Mixed Media Studio for George Brown College. Bahar brought with her

years of working with students and George Brown curriculum. Her knowledge on student

levels and approach, allowed us to develop a course that was responsive to student

learning needs whilst also supportive of overall curricular outcomes and touchpoint.

Most importantly the collaboration was an exchange, where Bahar was open to

my studio-based approach to pedagogy and teaching, while also setting clear needs from

the design learning side of curriculum. We exchanged methods of ideation and needs that

informed the assignments. (Derek Liddington)

Knowledge of Art and Design and Collaborative Skills and Attitude as Critical Factors

in Successful Collaboration and Leadership. In this regard, “one faculty member explained,

There is a temptation to “fix” curriculum challenges by just making it more “digital”.

This was not Bahar’s approach. Her approach is more human and based on the needs of

students as unique individuals with busy lives and concerns. Bahar’s strength comes from

many sources: her commanding knowledge of the art and design field and maybe most

importantly — the caring and compassion she has for her students and her fellow faculty

members. (Doug Darrah)

The importance of building meaningful relationship and the role of mutual respect

between collaborators at different levels of the institution in bringing about change are

highlighted in the following statement:

 220

I began my role as Liaison Librarian for the School of Design at GBC in January 2009,

but it was not until I met and started working with Bahar that I saw the true potential of

what could be accomplished, in collaboration. The sign of a valuable and valued

relationship between academic faculty and their librarian is one of collaboration, one in

which each party recognizes the talents and expertise of the other, and finds ways to

integrate those aspects together, to strengthen and benefit student learning. (Corinne

Abba, Liaison Librarian)

Dr. Elise Hodson, Chair, School of Design from 2013-2018 had a significant role in

initiating and conducting curriculum development in the Art and Design Foundation Program. I

believe that Elise’s expertise in the field of art and design, extensive experience in learning-

centered curriculum planning and design research as well as compassionate and effective

leadership skills in addition to positive attitude toward change was crucial in meeting our team’s

goal in a successful manner. The following statement summarizes our team’s achievements from

the point of view of Elise as the Chair of the School of Design during the process of curriculum

improvement and development.

In the academic year 2015-2016, George Brown College began a review of programs

with low retention, including the one-year Art and Design Foundation certificate. Data

showed that many students were not returning for the second semester and that enrolment

was declining. The program has a long tradition within the School of Design and the

overall curriculum structure had remained the same for many years, despite the changing

student body and increasing pressures on students, faculty and administrators.

The program guides students to develop art and design-related skills and to create

a portfolio with which they can apply to undergraduate programs at George Brown and
 221

elsewhere. However, new academic pathways had opened up with new admission

requirements, and the portfolios needed to be updated. Furthermore, similar certificate

programs are offered at other Ontario colleges, making it difficult for prospective

students to decide where to apply.

There were mixed reactions among faculty about revising the long-standing

curriculum and the small number of full-time faculty meant that Bahar faced limited

resources for this time consuming work. At the time of the retention study, Bahar had just

been named the new Program Coordinator. She embraced this challenge, first leading a

study of student and faculty experiences, then mapping and developing curriculum with

faculty and experts from the Office of Academic Excellence, and finally conducting

follow-up studies to determine if the changes had made an impact on the curriculum and

the small number of full-time faculty meant that Bahar faced limited resources for this

time-consuming work. Through several focused group meetings, Bahar was able to

update program outcomes which she then used as the basis for her one-on-one

consultations with individual faculty members.

Bahar worked closely and thoughtfully with faculty to revise course descriptions

and update assignments, balancing the needs expressed by students and faculty with

Ministry requirements. At the same time, she conducted her doctoral research through the

classes she was teaching, deepening her understanding of the student body.

Bahar’s student and faculty-centred approach paid off. By listening to the students

and finding creative solutions with administration, Bahar was able to reform the program

so that, for the first time, students had electives and could tailor their second semester to

build on their interests developed in the first semester (thereby differentiating the
 222

program from others in the province). She implemented a system of pre-requisites which

helped to set students up for success rather than failure.

Other achievements included reducing overlap between the classes so that

students did not face unmanageable workloads. Faculty were responsive to student data

that Bahar collected, revealing which classes were most rewarding and challenging.

Enrolment and retention increased as program quality improved. Pride and collaboration

also grew. For the first time, students and faculty created displays for the year end show

that rivalled those of other programs. (Dr. Elise Hodson, Chair at the School of Design,

2013-2018)

Figure 45 (see Appendix G x) shows the exhibition room of Art and Design Foundation

Program’s student works produced by the G108 students and faculty during the academic year

2017-2018 at the Year End Show (YES) that took place at the School of Design in the Winter

2018.

Phase B.4 - Move to New Direction

Based on my evaluation of the program in terms of the demographic change of students

who were attending the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) and their evolving

educational needs as well as the findings of the program review conducted by the Office of

Academic Excellence in the Academic Year 2019-2020, I proposed a new plan for program

curriculum development in G108 for implementation in the academic year 2021-2022. I believe

that this new plan will support the strategic goals of George Brown College in meeting the

current enrollment target, the potential of setting a new higher enrollment target, to increase

graduate satisfaction and will better equip the G108 program graduates with the competencies
 223

(knowledge, skills and attitudes) necessary for the evolving and ever-competitive environments

of the art and design practices in the 21st century.

Here are the main insights from my analysis of the findings of the program review:

• Students enjoy the flexibility of the program offering of electives in the second

semester which was introduced in the academic year 2017-2018, and request

flexible options for the first semester as well;

• There are a growing number of international and domestic applicants with post-

secondary degrees and/ or professional experience in other disciplines and fields

of practice who choose the G108 program for an agile and enriched professional

bridge to the marketplace;

• Despite the program’s preliminary goal of providing students with pathways

toward further education, students are looking for more flexible alternatives after

graduation including direct job opportunities in the creative industries as well as

entrepreneurship.

Plan of Action

This is my proposed plan of action:

• Development of new Program Learning Outcomes aligned with the competencies

proposed within the new courses;

• Development of new elective courses (course outline, assignments and assessment

methods) that clearly identify the intended learning outcomes;

• Formation of a Program Advisory Committee (PAC) which can include graduates

of the program who are currently pursuing their studies in another art and design

program, have graduated from their second program at the School/ other
 224

institutions, or have directly pursued a career in the field of art and design after

graduating from the G108 program as well as faculty from other programs at the

School of Design such as Game art, Graphic Design and Interaction Design, and

secondary school representatives.

Program Vocational Learning Outcomes

Addition of two new Program Learning Outcomes to address acquiring competencies in

art and business, leadership, project management, social media and entrepreneurship.

New Electives Courses

1st Semester. These are the elective courses that I propose for semester one of the

program:

• History and Theory of Design: This course is for the students who are interested

in learning about design theories, design thinking and creative industries in the

20th Century as well as the 21st Century;

• Illustration and Conceptual Art: This course is for the students who already

have basic drawing skills and are interested in the further development of those

skills with an emphasis on experimental illustration and concept art;

• Creative Industries in the Age of Social Media: This course will introduce the

concept of social media and its role in the art and design practice with practical art

and design-directed/ social media projects.

2nd Semester. These are the new elective courses that I propose for the semester two of the

program:

• Critical Studies in Art and Design: This course will teach critical research skills

to study and address the contemporary theoretical and practical issues in the field
 225

of art and design such as social and sustainable issues, healthcare design,

education, urban planning…;

• Art, Design and Entrepreneurship: This course will be facilitated by a faculty

with an interdisciplinary background in the field of art and design and will include

a series of lectures and workshops by practitioners with expertise in teaching

business concepts and project management skills necessary for successful

business initiatives in the field of art and design; may include Internship/

Placement and/ or collaboration with StartGBC.

Other Suggestions

• Change the name of Advanced Digital Media to Digital Media: Design Tools &

Processes (This name change fits the current course plan that includes cross-

projects with the Design Process course).

New Prerequisites

I proposed the following prerequisites for the new second semester courses:

• Painting and Mixed-Media: Foundation Drawing I or Illustration and

Conceptual Art.

• Art, Design and Entrepreneurship: Introduction to Digital Media and Creative

Industries in the Age of Social Media.

• Critical Studies in Art and Design: Art Culture or History and Theory of

Design.
 226

Table 10

Proposed Curriculum Structure

Semester 1

Code Course Name

ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space

ART1029 Introduction to Digital Media
COMM1007 College English
Electives (Any 3)

ART1019 Foundation Drawing I: Observational Drawing and Composition

ART1030 Introduction to Photography

ART1031 Art Culture

NEW *History and Theory of Design
NEW *Illustration and Conceptual Art
NEW *Creative Industries in the Age of Social Media
 227

Semester 2

Code Course Name

ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice

ART1036 Art and Design Portfolio Showcase
DESN1020 Design Process
Electives (Any 3)
ART1024 Foundation Drawing II: Life Drawing
ART1040 Painting and Mixed Media Studio
ART1025 3D Materials and Techniques
Advanced Digital Media (*New- Digital Media: Design Tools &
ART1035
Processes)
ART1033 Multimedia Storytelling

ART1043 Photography: People, Concepts and Stories

DESN1084 2D Digital Art 1 (dual credit with Game Art)
NEW *Art, Design and Entrepreneurship
NEW *Critical Studies in Art and Design

Summary of Chapter Five

In this chapter, I answered the following action research questions about my role as the

Academic Coordinator in the Art and Design Foundation Program at George Brown College

School of Design : What did I do? (actions that I took based on my assumptions), What did I

learn? (learning about things that I do from my own perspective as well as others), What was the

significance of my actions on the implementation of outcomes-based education in our program

from others’ point of view?

Based on the action research model emerged from my study (Figure 4, see p. 77), first I

explained the actions that I took in the development and improvement of the curriculum with an
 228

OBE approach. Then, I used the ideology critique tool proposed by Brookfield (1995) to discuss

my own view on the implementation of outcomes-based education in curriculum development

and improvement in comparison with some dominant views of my colleagues who participated

in my study. To understand other’s point of view on my role as the academic coordinator in

curriculum planning and in collaboration with my peers, I analyzed the findings collected from

my colleagues who participated in my study as well as other stakeholders in the administration.

The research insights from this evaluation will support me in the improvement of outcomes-

based and learning-centered curriculum planning in collaboration with faculty.

 Chapter Six: Conclusions and Implications of the Findings

In this action research, I studied the development and implementation of outcomes-based

courses and curriculum in the Art and Design Foundation Program (G108) at George Brown

College School of Design. In Chapter Four, I reported in detail my findings in response to

Research Questions 1) How do I develop and implement an outcomes-based course and

curriculum? and 2) How do I improve the quality of my praxis? In Chapter Five, I then reported

my findings in response to Research Question 3) How do I contribute to the implementation of

outcomes-based education in the institution?

This chapter includes conclusions, the synthesis of my insights, the contribution of my

findings to scholarship, and implications of the action-research study of my praxis in teaching

and developing art and design foundation curriculum with an outcomes-based approach and

further research.

In this section, I present the synthesis of my insights including an integrated working

model of action research emerged from my study as well as the synthesis of my insights for each

of the two phases of this study: Phase A which is a Critical Dialogue with Self and Phase B

which is a Critical Dialogue with Institution.

Conclusions

The review of the literature in chapter two gave me a comprehensive understanding of the

critical issues in the overall implementation of outcomes – based education in several western

postsecondary systems (Biggs & Tang, 2007; Lennon, 2010; Liu, 2015; Pichette & Watkins,

2018; Spady, 1994). While understanding the principles of OBE articulated by Spady (1994,

2020) and the constructive alignment proposed by Biggs and Tang (2007) were the theoretical

229
 230

cornerstone of my research, I believe further research is needed in the realm of teaching and

assessing creativity within a learner – centered paradigm.

In Chapter Four and Chapter Five, I used McNiff’s proposed process (McNiff, 2016) to

organize the analysis of my findings in Phase A and Phase B of my study through the following

steps:

1. Take action: I explained the actions that I took in Phase A and Phase B of my study

with a clear depiction of the setting and my interaction with the setting.

2. Study the action: I researched and analyzed my actions based on the data collected in

each phase of my study to come up with an understanding of my own practice using

observation and reflection while being engaged with the literature to generate theory

at both micro (course) and macro (program) levels within the educational framework

of outcomes-based education.

3. Generate theory: I defined my educational theories in the role of teacher-practitioner

(Phase A) and academic coordinator-practitioner (Phase B) in terms of my own lived

experience in interaction and collaboration with the participants of my study.

(McNiff, 2016, pp. 14-25)

The syntheses of my findings in Phase A - Critical Dialogue with Self and Phase B -

Critical Dialogue with the Institution highlight my educational and leadership beliefs, values and

principles emerged from my action research study in the form of personal narrative statements

under each phase.

In Phase A, I have developed my personal practical theory of teaching the foundation of

art and design in a college setting in Ontario. The validity of my theory of outcomes-based

teaching and learning in the field of art and design foundation lies in the analysis of my findings
 231

in Chapter Four that show students believe that I care about their outcome in the program, their

future education and career path, and overall in their lives.

In Phase B, I have developed my personal practical theory of leadership in coordinating

the curriculum and working in an effective way with my colleagues to bring positive change in

the Art and Design Foundation Program at the School of Design. The validity of my theory of

leading a collaborative community of practice lies in the analysis of my findings in Chapter Five

that show my colleagues think that their opinion and experience matter in the overall planning of

an outcomes-based and learning-centered curriculum in our program.

Synthesis of My Insights: An Integrated Model of Action Research

In this case study, my method of enquiry was action research within the paradigm of

qualitative research. I first developed an integrated model of action research based on McNiff

and Withehead’s theory of action research (2011) as well as Kemmis’s (2006) cycle of action-

reflection with an emphasis on action research “as a process of personal and collective inquiry

that is about change, collaboration and democratic practices and a commitment towards humans’

and other entities’ well-being” (McNiff, 2014, p. 27). Figure 7 (see p. 80) depicts the stages that I

used to conduct research during my case study.

Throughout my study, I continued my review of the literature on action research. In the

book entitled Writing and Doing Action Research published in 2016, McNiff shares her

theoretical and practical model of action research and encourages qualitative researchers to make

their stories public in the form of their personal and collaborative theories of practice.

My next step is to communicate the living story of my teaching practice and academic

leadership in relation to myself, my students, my colleagues and the institution, highlighting

personal and collective challenges and achievements. According to McNiff (2016),

 232

action research is a sound and appropriate research methodology with the main goals of

generating new knowledge and action-oriented outcomes while educating both the

researcher and the participants… the practice of action research as a practice may

therefore be seen in the process of life itself where everything is in a process of

evaluation. (pp. 14-15)

Using the critical tools of action research emerged from my study, I researched my

actions, as an individual teacher as well as an academic coordinator, in collaboration with others

within my community of practice to then understand what I need to improve my actions.

Figure 21 depicts the model of action research that I have developed after the completion

of my study based on my theoretical framework described in Chapter One and my research

methodology explained in Chapter Three as well as my lived-experience of the teacher-

practitioner-researcher during my study while staying engaged with the new emerging literature

on action research throughout my study.

Figure 21

Concurrent Phase A and Phase B of Action-Research Model proposed by Mousavi Hejazi

Evaluation Phase A Action Evaluation Phase B Action

Critical Critical
Dialogue Dialogue
with Self with
Institution

Research Research

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2021)

The concurrent action-research model depicted in Figure 21 is the integrated and

simplified version of the action-research model depicted in Figure 7 (see p. 80). While I used the
 233

stages in the proposed model (Figure 7) to conduct my study, I integrated the action-research

steps of my study in a more blended format (Figure 21) to write the report of my study.

Synthesis of My Insights: Phase A – Critical Dialogue with Self

In Phase A of my research analysed in Chapter Four, first I explained the actions that I

took as an art and design educator in each phase of the Learning Cycle (Motivation,

Comprehension, Practice, Application) with a clear description of the setting and my interaction

with the setting. Then, I studied my planning and actions through the analysis of the data

collected in each phase of the Learning Cycle to come up with an understanding of my own

practice by observation, reflection-in-action/ reflection-on-action, and becoming engaged with

the literature to generate theory at micro and macro levels.

Therefore, I explained what I think should be done to improve my actions in each phase

of the Learning Cycle based on my own values and criteria for judgement. “Action research

defines practitioner’s theories in terms of living practices. This practice-based form of theory is

embodied in the lives of real people” (McNiff, 2016, p. 21). Finally, I explained what I learned

through the action research process in order to improve my practice and live in the direction of

my values.

The following statements embody my educational values and principles of teaching art

and design foundation within an outcomes-based paradigm of teaching and learning.

A Holistic Approach to Teaching and Learning of the Foundation of Art and Design

My findings from the critical study of my teaching shows a holistic approach to teaching

the foundation of art and design. Using the outcomes-based principles of constructive alignment

of intended learning outcomes, teaching/ learning activities and assessment tasks, I make a

systematic connection between the different components of the courses that I teach in the
 234

program. I use the theory of gestalt where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts as the

basis of my course and curriculum planning. By mapping the course outcomes in alignment with

the program learning outcomes within the course outcomes, I create a course structure where

lectures, activities and projects are working cohesively together to meet the intended outcomes.

This holistic approach to course planning supports effective teaching within a learning-centered

environment.

Proactivity and Reflexivity in My Teaching Practice With the Goal of Self-Improvement and

Growth Based on Personal Beliefs and Social Values

I am passionate about teaching art and design, and believe that a good teacher is a good

learner so I consider myself a lifelong learner who seeks new opportunities to learn and grow. To

improve my teaching practice, I use critical reflection based on self-awareness to reflect during

the action and as well after the occurrence of my actions based on the observation of my students

and my interactions with my students within the teaching/ learning environment. Through

conscious endeavor and based on my personal beliefs and values, I take initiative to come up

with better solutions in my teaching by adapting myself to changing circumstances that are

outside of the scope of my control while acting upon the events that can shape the results of my

actions. “If your beliefs can drive what you can accomplish, then it goes without saying that the

size of your beliefs will drive the size of your accomplishments” (Fritz, 2008, p.46).

Based on my life experience as well as my professional journey, I understand that to

follow my passion and to achieve my goals, I need to work hard, to keep a positive attitude and

to be patient in order to reach success. I am not afraid of failure as I believe that failure is the

result of inaction and that action toward outcomes always bear positive results.
 235

A Flexible Learning-Centered Approach in Course Planning

Flexibility in course planning and management is based on the outcomes-based principle

of expanded opportunity for learning success which is about “giving a second chance to

students” (Spady, 2020, p.21) and alternatives in all the different phases of the learning Cycle to

be able for example to work in their own time frame and/ or correct their project after

assessment. The findings of my study in Phase A shows that creating flexible and adaptable

course structures that offer options in terms of teaching/ learning activities, deliverables and

timelines foster inclusiveness and support student learning. During the study, student participant

mentioned their appreciation of a customized and flexible learning plan in helping them to

overcome their challenges in a successful manner. To achieve adaptability in course delivery, I

need to keep being flexible and open to new possibilities, and continue to explore new ways of

teaching by integrating different types of formative feedback, reflexivity, peer feedback and

dialogue while facilitating the transfer of knowledge within the loop of comprehension-practice

of the learning cycle. I need to explore further the personalization of the assessment tasks to

optimize the effectiveness of my teaching.

Sense of Care Towards Student Learning

My findings of Phase A show that my attitude toward my students has a crucial role in

their overall learning experience. In addition to my expert knowledge and preparedness, students

value positive personal attributes such as empathy, kindness, sense of care, patience, honesty and

professionalism in the way I connect with them as teacher, a coach and a mentor. I believe that a

friendly, safe, stress-free and encouraging learning climate is key to the flourishment of

creativity within a studio-based environment where the main focus is to experiment with new

forms of artistic expression and designerly ways of doing.

 236

Mentality of Success in Teaching and Learning: We Are a Team and We Are Working

Together to Succeed

I believe that success can only be achieved when I work with others. Fritz (2008) advises,

You can never accomplish everything you would like to on your own, so you will need to

be able to work with others in order to achieve the success you desire. How effectively

you get along with others can be a major factor in achieving that success, and your people

skills are what will. (p. 130)

It is with this mentality of success that I embark in the journey of teaching and learning.

In this way, I see myself as a part of a team of learners who are working to achieve success. I

work with my students to overcome the challenges with an outcome focus approach while

ensuring that they are aware that I am there to support them in reaching their goals in their

journey of artistic self-discovery.

Synthesis of My Insights: Phase B – Critical Dialogue with the Institution

In Phase B of my research analysed in Chapter Five, first I explained the actions that I

took as an Academic Coordinator in initiating and working in collaboration with my colleagues

at the School of Design on learning-centered, outcomes-based curriculum planning and

development prior and throughout my study.

Then, I researched outcomes-based and learning-centered actions of other educators in

my setting through the analysis of the collected data by creating critical dialogue with my peers.

The analysis of the curriculum supported me in the development of a new curricular proposal

with an outcomes-based approach.

Finally, I explained what I learned through my action research process in order to

improve my practice and make a difference in my working environment. The following

 237

statements embody my educational values and principles of teaching art and design foundation

within an outcomes-based paradigm of teaching and learning.

A Holistic Learning-Centered Approach in the Art and Design Foundation Curriculum

Planning

In collaboration with the Office of Academic Excellence and under the supervision of the

Chair at the School of Design, I used a systematic and iterative approach to review the Art and

Design Foundation Program curriculum based on previous program reviews, competitive

analysis of similar programs across Ontario Colleges and insights emerged from my research and

faculty inputs based on the outcomes-based and learning-centered policies and guidelines at

George Brown College. The results of the first phase of the curriculum development that took

place in the academic year 2016-2017 were the development of new program learning outcomes,

new courses and a new educational structure, in addition to the improvement of the existing

courses. With the support of my colleagues, we reviewed all the courses and assignments in

alignment with the program learning outcomes to create a flowing and holistic curriculum with

cross-projects and aligned outcomes. The new curriculum initiative that is based on a recent

program review conducted by the Office of Academic Excellence is building upon new pathways

and new demands of the marketplace in the creative industries.

Use of New Strategies to Engage Faculty in Curriculum Development

I used collaborative strategies and personalized ways of communication to engage my

colleagues in the process of curriculum development. Building upon my previous good working

rapport that I had with my peers and the strong support of the administration at the School of

Design, I was able to develop trust and respect by listening to the ideas of the faculty with an

open mind. I shared my experience and my thoughts about the curriculum with honesty and
 238

truthfulness and in this way, I invited my colleagues to share their own knowledge and

experience with me without any judgement. During this process, I was open to come up with

new results that would support us in becoming more effective teachers.

Use of New Strategies to Engage Students in Curriculum Development

I used informal conversations and short surveys to understand my students’ ideas about

their experience in the Art and Design Foundation Program. I explained the program learning

outcomes and how the knowledge, skills and attitudes they acquire in this program will support

them in their life and their career. Learning about the outcomes of each course and the way

projects are built to achieve the intended learning outcomes had a significant impact on students’

engagement and as well created an ongoing platform to get insights for curriculum development

and improvement.

Use of Design Thinking Tools in Curriculum Design

As a practitioner with an education in the field of design, I use design processes and

creative tools to approach curriculum development and improvement. Adapted from Aspelund’s

design process (2015), Figure 22 is the proposed model that I have developed based on design

thinking tools that can be used in the planning of OBE. These tools include brainstorming,

research, conceptualization, visualization, production and testing within a cyclical and iterative

processes of thinking and doing.

 239

Figure 22

Design Thinking Process in OBE Curriculum Planning Proposed by Mousavi Hejazi

Conceptualization Brainstorming Testing Visualization

Thinking Doing

Production
Research

Source: Copyright © Bahar Mousavi Hejazi (2021)

As a designer, I believe in systems and processes, this is why action research as a form of

systems thinking is aligned with the way I see the world that surrounds me:

With systems thinking, the belief is that the world is systematic, which means that

phenomena are understood to be an emergent property of an interrelated whole. An

emergent property of a whole is said to arise where a phenomenon cannot be fully

comprehended in terms only of constituent parts. ‘The whole is greater than the sum of its

parts’, is the popularized phrase that explain emergence. (McNiff, 2016, p.18)

Empowering Students and Faculty by Giving Voice to Their Individual Beliefs and Values In

Art and Design Education

By listening to my colleagues’ and students’ ideas and implementing those thoughts in

my practice, I intend to create an ongoing dialogue with the aim of growth and empowerment. In

this context and throughout my study, I was able to develop collaborative shared forms of

learning by reflecting on my own actions, and sharing them with my students and my colleagues
 240

through descriptions and explanations of my actions as well as the reasons and purposes behind

my actions.

This process is known as theorizing: [action researchers] explain the significance of their

actions for different constituencies and imagine ways in which they could have done

things differently. Action research may therefore be seen as a form of ethics in action,

when ethics is understood as a discourse for rethinking our relations to other people. It is

always about people thinking, working and creating knowledge together, a commitment

towards improvement, that is, a move towards however those people understand ‘the

good’. (McNiff, 2016, p. 16)

Research positionality is one of the most crucial characteristics of action research and its

critical approach. Based on Habermas’s theory of human interest (1987), McNiff (2016) stresses

out the importance of clarity in defining the attitude of the action researcher when they research

their practice and as well communicate their stories to their audience. Therefore, action

researchers should question how they position themselves in relation to others, whose interests

they serve when they do research in action and how they communicate this.

Habermas sets out three main forms of human interests:

a. Technical interests: focus on the production of technical rational knowledge with

the aim of controlling the natural and social world.

b. Practical interests: focus on meaning-making and interpretation, in order to

understand the social life-world and its historical and political emergence.

c. Emancipatory interests: help people to understand the influences that lead them to

think and act as they do, to liberate their own thinking and resist closure.
 241

d. In Action Research: Principles and Practices (McNiff, 2002 and 2013a), McNiff

added a relational interest, about the need for dialogical relationships, where

people talk together to improve their learning as the basis of improving their life-

worlds. (McNiff, 2016, pp. 24-25)

Based on McNiff’s theory of action research positionality (2016), I took multiple

positionalities throughout my study: as an insider, studying my own practices which involves

self-study and autobiography, and as an insider, working collaboratively with other insiders and

studying myself in relation with them. In the research of my teaching practice, my position was

first-person action researcher inquiring my own praxis to produce descriptions and explanations

for what I was doing. While in my role as the program coordinator, I took in addition the stand of

third-person action researcher which extends the research field to wider groupings, such as

organizations.

I believe in dialogical relationships where I shared my practice with others- the

administration, my colleagues and my students- and listened to their stories with open-

mindedness and empathy, and gave voice to my community of practice by being an active

member of the community. In this way, I believe I improved myself and my teaching in a way

that benefits both myself and my community, creates a collective vision for success that

embraces plurality and inclusion, and transforms challenges to opportunities with the aim of

personal and social growth.

The changes that I have seen as the result of my project are reflected in the feedback and

comments that I have received from my students and my colleagues which I have explained in

detail in Chapter Four and Chapter Five. Being engaged in this action research study immersed

me in the cycle of action – reflection both in my teaching practice and in my role as the
 242

Academic Coordinator while using the tools and principles of outcomes – based education and

learning – centered methods.

Implications for Practice

First and foremost, the implication of my study is to continue engaging myself in an

ongoing process of self-improvement and intellectual/ professional growth. By telling the story

of my lived-experience, I intend to actively engage like-minded educators in the field of creative

industries both inside (locally) and outside (globally) of my organization.

As a curriculum designer, I would like to share my theory and knowledge of action

research that has emerged from my study with like-minded curriculum planners in other fields of

practice. Table 10 demonstrates the general competencies (knowledge, skills, attitudes) that I

believe are important in an effective implementation of an outcomes-based education. I have

categorized the knowledge, skills and attitudes in terms of their importance as being essential or

highly recommended. I believe while essential competencies are the ones that learning – centered

educators should be able to demonstrate in their teaching practice, acquiring the highly

recommended competencies will support teachers in their adaption of outcomes – based and

learning centered tools and principles in a more efficient way.

 243

Table 11

General Competencies (Knowledge, Skills, Attitude) for Educators and Their Importance in

the Implementation of an Effective OBE Curriculum

Competencies

Importance Knowledge Skills Attitude

Essential • Principles of • Flexible • Critical

OBE course Reflection
• Constructive planning • Flexibility
Alignment • Customization • Mentality of
of the learning collective
plan success
• Facilitation • Empathy
• Mentoring • Willingness to
• Coaching learn
• Willingness to
improve

Highly • Theory of • Making • Openness to

Recommended Gestalt connections feedback
• Learning- between parts • Conscious
Centered • Observational endeavor
Methods skills

As an Academic Coordinator, I intend to share my lived-experience of collaboration

through dialogue and common interests to create a platform of ongoing conversation, and to

mentor the next generation of educators and educational leaders in the field of art and design.

Implications and Further Research

This action research study was of only one person, me, in the context of only one

program, the Art and Design Program, at only one Ontario College. I acknowledge that the

research findings are therefore not generalizable. However, given that the Ontario colleges are

mandated to create outcomes-based curriculum for all college programs, the insights I gleaned
 244

during this action research study will be of interest to all educators in the Ontario colleges and

particularly to those who teach in unique programs that focus on art and design.

Further research that studies the impact of processes similar to mine in Phases A and B in

other programs would add to our understanding of best practices for effective implementation of

outcomes-based, learner-centred curricula. In terms of using action research as my method of

inquiry, my focus has been on the improvement of my own practice based on the cycles of

action-reflection but I believe it would be interesting to study how to bring social change in

outcomes-based education using the investigative tools of action research in future projects.

Contribution of the Findings

In Phase A, I developed my personal practical theory of teaching foundation of art and

design in a college setting, focused on appropriate learning outcomes. The credibility of my

theory of outcomes-based teaching and learning in the field of art and design foundation lies in

the fact that students reported that my actions made the expected learning outcomes in the course

clear and related to their future education and career path, and overall in their life.

In Phase B, I developed my personal practical theory of leadership in coordinating the

curriculum and working in an effective way with my colleagues to bring positive change in the

department. The credibility of my personal theory of leading a collaborative community of

practice lies in the fact that my colleagues reported that their opinion and experience mattered in

the overall collaborative planning of an effective outcomes-based and learning-centered

curriculum.

The insights gained from my detailed description of how I engaged in action-research as

a means of enhancing the quality and effectiveness of my own teaching praxis, and that of my

institution, will be of interest to all postsecondary faculty, not only to those who teach in design
 245

programs similar to the one that was the site of this case study. My proposed Action Research

Cycle (Figure 21, see p. 232) contributes a valuable tool for enhancing the scholarship of

teaching and learning in any academic program.

 References

Adam, S. (2006). An introduction to learning outcomes: A consideration of the nature,

function and position of learning outcomes in the creation of the European higher

education area, article B.2.3-1. In E. Froment, J. Kohler, L. Purser and L. Wilson (Eds.),

EUA Bologna Handbook – Making Bologna Work. Berlin : Raabe Verlag. Retrieved from

http://www.eua.be/index.php?id=129

Adamson, L., Becerro, M., Cullen, P., González-Vega L., Sobrino, J. J., & Ryan, N. (2010).

Quality assurance and learning outcomes. ENQA Workshop Report 17. Helsinki, Finland.

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED541663

Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997.

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder: Westview.

Amabile, T. M. (2018). Creativity and the labor of love. In R. J. Stenberg & J. C. Kaufman

(Eds.), The nature of human creativity (pp. 1–15). Cambridge University Press.

Acar S., & Runco, M. A. (2014). Assessing associative distance among ideas elicited by tests of

divergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 26, 229–238.

Acar S., & Runco, M. A. (2015). Thinking in multiple directions: Hyperspace categories in

divergent thinking. Psychology of Art, Creativity, and Aesthetics, 9, 41–53.

Acar S., & Runco, M. A. (2017). Latency predicts category switch in divergent thinking.

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11, 43–51.

Archer, B. (2005). The need for design education. In B. Archer, K. Baynes, & P. Roberts

(Eds.), A framework for design and design Education: A reader containing key papers

from the 1970s and 80s (pp. 16–21). the Design and Technology Association (DATA).

Balchin. T. (2005). A Creativity Feedback Package for Teachers and Students of Design and

246
 247

Technology in the UK. International Journal of Design and Technology Education,

(10)2, 31 – 43. Retrieved July 21, 2021, from

https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/view/Journal_10.2_RES3/104

Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological

Science, 1, 2.

Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. I. (2011). Assessing creativity in the classroom. The

Open Education Journal, 4 (Suppl 1: M5), 58–66.

Barr, R. B. & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate

education. Washington: Change Magazine, 13-25.

Bates, I., Bloomer, M., Hodkinson, P.; & Yeomans, D. (1998). Progressivism and

the GNVQ:context, ideology and practice, Journal of Education and Work 112: 109-126.

Berger, J. (1980). About looking. London: Writers and Readers.

Berlach, R. G. (2004, November 28-December 2). Outcomes-based education & the death of

knowledge [Paper presentation]. The Australian Association for Research in Education.

The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Bernsen, J. (1987). 12 principles in design management. Design Management in Practice. EEC

European Design Editions, Danish Design Council.

Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity, 2nd ed., Oxford: Rowman &

Littlefield Publishers.

Biggs, J.; & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student

does. Michigan: McGraw-Hill.

Bleakley, A. (2004). Your creativity or mine? A typology of creativities in higher education and

the value of a pluralistic approach. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(4), 463-475.

Block, J. H. (Ed.). (1971). Mastery learning: Theory and practice. New York: Holt, Rinehardt
 248

and Winston.

Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational

objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain,

Longmans, Green, New York, Toronto.

Bloom, B. S. (1973). Every kid can: Learning for mastery. Washington, DC:College/University

Press.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to

theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bolton, R. (2005). Habermas’s theory of communicative action and the theory of social

Capital [paper presentation]. The Association of American Geographers. Denver:

Colorado. http://web.williams.edu/Economics/papers/Habermas.pdf

Borja De Mozota, B. (2003). Design management: Using design to build brand value and

corporate innovation. New York: Allworth Press.

Borja De Mozota, B. (2006). The four powers of design: A value model in design management.

åDesign Management Review.

Borja De Mozota, B. (2011). design economics-microeconomics and macroeconomics:

Exploring the value of designers’ skills in our 21st century economy. 1st International

Symposium for Design Education Researchers. CUMULUS // DRS SIG on Design

Pedagogy. La Bourse du Commerce, Paris.

Botella, M., & Lubart T. I. (2016). Creative processes: Art, design and science. In G. Corazza &

S. Agnoli (Eds.), Multidisciplinary contributions to the science of creative thinking (pp.

53–65). Springer.

Botella, M., Zenansi, F., & Lubart, T. (2018, 21 November). What are the stages of the creative
 249

process? What visual students are saying? Frontiers in Psychology. Laboratoire

Adaptations Travail-Individu, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02266

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.

Cedefop. (2009). The shift to learning outcomes: Policies and practices in Europe. Luxembourg:

Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Cedefop Reference series,

72. Retrieved July 19, 2021, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/3054_en.pdf

Collins, M.A., & Amabile, T.M. (1999). Creativity by contract: social influences on the

creativity of professional artists. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.) The international handbook of

creativity (pp.297-312). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Covey, S. R. (2004). The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. NY, Free Press.

Covey, S. R. (2006). Leading in a knowledge worker age. In F. Hesselbein & M. Goldsmith

(Eds.), The leader of the future 2: visions, strategies, and practices for the new era (pp.

224-225). Jossey-Bass.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches,

3rd ed., California: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391–

404.

Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London: Springer-Verlag.

Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper

and Row.

Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1996a). Creativity: The work and lives of 91 eminent people.

 250

New York: HarperCollins.

Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1996b). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery an invention.

New York: HarperCollins.

Cumming, A., & Ross, M. (2007). The Tuning project for medicine—Learning outcomes for

undergraduate medical education in Europe. Medical Teacher, 29, 636–641.

Cumulus International Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design.

(September 2, 2016). Tuning Document: Design Education. Retrieved July 17, 2020 from

http://www.unideusto.org/tuningeu/images/stories/Summary_of_outcomes_TN/Design_d

ocument.pdf

Davies, A. (2012). Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria in Art and Design: What’s the

Recurring Problem? Retrieved July 21, 2021, from

http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/projects/networks/issue-18-july-2012/learning-outcomes-and-

assessment-criteria-in-art-and-design.-whats-the-recurring-problem

Dearing, R. (1997). Higher Education in the learning society: Report of the national committee.

London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. www.ex.ac.uk/dearing.html.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D.C. Heath & Company.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the

educative process, revised edition. New York: D.C. Heath & Company.

Driscoll, A. & Wood, S. (2007). Developing outcomes-based assessment for learner-centered

education: A faculty introduction. Virginia: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) Workshop Report 17.

(2010). Quality Assurance and Learning Outcomes. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED541663

European Commission. (2006b). The Helsinki communiqué on enhanced European cooperation

 251

in vocational education and training. European Ministers of Vocational Education and

Training, the European social partners and the European Commission. Brussels: European

Commission. Retrieved August 2021, from

http://www.minedu.fi/export/sites/default/vet2006/pdf/Helsinki_Communique_en.pdf

EPC (European Parliament Council) (2008). Recommendation of The European Parliament and

of The Council, 23 April 2008, on the establishment of the European Qualifications

Framework for lifelong learning. Official Journal of European Union, 6.5.2008, C111/1–

C111/7.

European Union. (2008). The European qualifications framework for lifelong learning.

Brussels: European Commission, Education and Training. Reprieved August, 2010, from

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/eqf/rec08_en.pdf

Findeli, A. (2001, Winter 2001). Rethinking design education for the 21st century: Theoretical,

methodological, and ethical discussion. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Design

Issues. 17 (1), 5-17.

Franc, L. H. (1978). Toward improving patterns of instruction. Durham, NH: New England

Teacher Corps Network.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder.

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Continuum, New

York.

Fritz, M. (2008). The truth about getting things done. Great Britain: Pearson Education

Limited.

Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from freedom. Austin, Texas: Holt Reinhartand and Winston.

Fryer, M. (2006). Facilitating creativity in higher education. In N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw

 252

and J. Wisdom (Eds.), Developing creativity in higher education: An imaginative

curriculum (pp.74-88). London: Routledge.

Fullan, M. (2004). Leading in a culture of change: Personal action guide and workbook. San

Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Gallagher, S. (2016). The future of university credentials: New developments at the

intersection of higher education and hiring. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J. (1974). Principles of instructional design. London: Holt, Rinehart and

Winston.

Gardner, H. (1994). Creating minds : An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud,

Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham and Ghandi. [S.l.]: Basic Books.

Garnett, J., Costley, C. & Workman, B. (eds.) (2009). Worked based learning: Journeys to the

core of higher education. Hendon: Middlesex University Press.

Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). Concern for discovery in the creative process.

In A. Rothenberg and C. R. Hausman (Eds.), The Creativity Question (pp. 161–165.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Sage qualitative research

kit. London: Sage.

Goff, L., Potter, M. K., Pierre, E., Carey, T., Gullage, A., Kustra, E., Lee, R., Lopes, V.,

Marshall, L., Martin, L., Raffoul, J., Siddiqui, A., & Van Gastel, G. (2015). Learning

outcomes assessment: A practitioner’s handbook. Toronto: HEQCO.

Gould, A., Stolarick, K., & Fasche, M. (2014). Why invest in design: Insights from industry

leaders. Design Advisory Committee and Martin Prosperity Institute. http://www-

2.rotman.utoronto.ca/mpi/content/why-invest-in-design-insights-from-industry-leaders/
 253

Gruber, H. E. (1989). “The evolving systems approach to creative work,” in Creative People at

Work: Twelve Cognitive Case Studies, eds D. B. Wallace and H. E. Gruber (New York,

NY: Oxford University Press), 3–24.

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454.

https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 2. Life world and system: A

critique of functionalist reason. (Translated by Thomas McCarthy). Boston: Beacon

Press.

Harden, R. M. (2007). Outcome-based education—The ostrich, the peacock and the beaver.

Medical Teacher, 29, 666–671.

Harden, R. M., Crosby, J. R., & Davis, M. H. (1999). AMEE Guide No 14: Outcome-based

education: Part 1—An introduction to outcome-based education. Medical Teacher, 21,

7–14.

Harrison, A. (2017). Skills, competencies and credentials. Toronto: Higher Education Quality

Council of Ontario.

Harvey, L. (2008). Placing Canadian quality assurance initiatives in an international context.

Prepared for the CMEC Quality Assurance Symposium, Quebec City, Quebec, May 27-

28, 2008.

Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2005). The action research dissertation: A Guide for Students and

Faculty. California: Sage Publications Ltd.

Hoidn, S., & Reusser, K. (2020). Foundations of student-centered learning and teaching. In
 254

Hoidn, S., & Klemenčič, M. (Eds), The Routledge International Handbook of

Student-Centered Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (1st ed., pp. 17-46).

Hoidn, S., (2020). Epilogue: Usable knowledge- policy and practice implications for student-

centered higher education. In Hoidn, S., & Klemenčič, M. (Eds), The Routledge

International Handbook of Student-Centered Learning and Teaching in Higher

Education (1 st ed., pp. 645-649).

Holly, M. L., Arhar, J. M., & Kasten, W. C. (2009). Action research for teachers: Traveling the

yellow brick road. Third Edition. Boston: Pearson.

Honsberger, J. (2014). Transformation to outcomes-based education (OBE) in Canada.

Retrieved April 2015, from

https://obecurriculumsessions.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/obe-transformation-2.pdf

Horkheimer, M. (1947). Eclipse of reason. New York: Oxford University Press.

Howard, T. J., Culley, S. J., & Dekoninck, E. (2008). Describing the creative design process

by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature. Des. Stud.

29, 160–180. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2008.01.001

Itten, J. (1965). Design and form: The basic course at the Bauhaus. First English Translation

edition. NY: Reinhold Publishing

Itten, J. (1970). The elements of colour: A treatise on the colour system of Johannes Itten

based on his book the art of colour. NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

Itten, J. (1973). The art of color: The subjective experience and objective rationale of color.

Second Edition. NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

Jenkins, A. & Unwin, D. (1996). How to write learning outcomes. Retrieved August 2010, from

http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/format/ outcomes.html
 255

Jones, L., & Moore, R. (1995). Appropriating competence: The competency movement, the New

Rightand and the 'culture change' project, British Journal of Education & Work 8(2): 78-

92.

Jones, E., Voorhes, R. A., & Paulson, K. (2001). Defining and assessing learning: Exploring

competency-based initiatives. Council of the National Postsecondary Education

Cooperative Competency-Based Initiatives Working Group. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Joyce, P., & Tutela, J. (2006). We make our road by talking: Preparing to do educational

research. In K. Tobin & J. Kincheloe, (Eds.), Doing Educational Research- A

Handbook, (pp. 59-84). The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Justice, L. (2019). The future of design: Innovating global products in a complex world.

London, UK.

Kalaitzidis, T. J., Litts, B., & Halverson, E. R. (2017). Designing collaborative production of

digital media. In C. M. Reigeluth, B. J. Beatty, & R. D. Myers (Eds.), Instructional–

design theories and models: The learner – centered paradigm of education (Vol. IV, pp.

173–204). Taylor & Francis.

Kemmis, S. (Ed.). (1982). The action research reader. Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Deakin

University Press.

Kemmis, S., (2006). Exploring the relevance of critical theory for action research:

Emancipatory action research in the footsteps of Jürgen Habermas. In P., Reason, & H.

Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of Action Research: The Concise Paperback Edition.

London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Kennedy D., Hyland A., & Ryan N. (2006). Writing and Using Learning Outcomes: A Practical
 256

Guide. In E. Froment, J. Kohler, P. L. Purser, & L. Wilson (Eds.). EUA Bologna

Handbook – Making Bologna Work (Article C 3.4-1). Berlin: Raabe Verlag.

Kenny, N., & Desmarais, S. (2012). A Guide to developing and assessing learning

outcomes at the University of Guelph. Ontario: University of Guelph, Office of the

Associate Vice-President Academic.

Killen, R. (2000). Outcomes-based education: Principles and possibilities. Retrieved April 2015

from http://drjj.uitm.edu.my/DRJJ/CONFERENCE/UPSI/OBEKillen.pdf

Kincheloe, J. L., & McLaren, P. L. (1994). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research.

In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, (pp. 138-

157). CA: Sage Publications Ltd.

Kohn, A. (1993). Turning learning into a business: Concerns about total quality. Educational

Leadership, 51(1), 58-61.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and

development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kopera-Frye, K., Mahaffy, J., & Svare, G.M. (2008). The map to curriculum alignment and

improvement. Collected Essays on Teaching and Learning (Vol. 1, pp. 8-14). Society for

Teaching and Learning in Higher Education.

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Bertram, B. M. (1973). Taxonomy of educational objectives,

the classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David

McKay Co. Inc.

Lennon, M.C. (2010a). A fine balance: Supporting skills and competency development .

Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Lennon, M. C. (2010b). Signalling abilities and achievement: Measuring and reporting on skill
 257

and competency development. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Lennon, M. C., Frank, B., Humphreys, J., Lenton, R., Madsen, K., Omri, A., & Turner, R.1

(2014). Tuning: Identifying and measuring sector-based learning outcomes in

postsecondary education. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems, Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-

46.

Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper and Rowe.

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry and practice. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Liu, Q. (2015). Outcomes-based education initiatives in Ontario postsecondary education: Case

studies. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity

Research Journal, 13(3-4), 295 – 308.

Lubart, T. I., & Getz, I. (1997). Emotion, metaphor, and the creative process. Creativity

Research Journal, 10(4), 285–301.

Lubart, T. I. (2018). Creativity across the seven Cs. In R. J. Stenberg & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.),

The nature of human creativity (pp. 134–146). Cambridge University Press.

Lubart, T. I., Mouchiroud, C., Tordjman, S., & Zenasni, F. (2015). Psychologie de la créativité

(Deuxième Edition). Psychology of Creativity. Paris: Armand Colin.

Mace, M.A., & Ward, T. (2002). Modeling the creative process: a grounded theory analysis of

creativity in the domain of art making. Creat. Res. J. 14, 179–192. doi:

10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_5

MacFarlane, A., & Brumwell, S. (2016). The landscape of learning outcomes assessment in

Canada. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Mager, R. F. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives. Georgia: CEP Press.

 258

Malan, S. P. T. (2000). The new paradigm of outcomes-based education in perspective.

Tydskrif Vir Verbruikerwetenskappe, 28, 22-28.

Marcus, H. (1964). One-dimensional man. Boston: Beacon Press.

Martin, C. (2011, May 4). Thoughts on HEQCO’s conference on learning outcomes.

http://www.ousa.ca/2011/05/24/thoughts-on-heqco-conference-on-learning-outcomes-

%E2%80%93-by-chris-martin-may-24-2011/

Masters, G. N. & Evans, J. (1986). A sense of direction in criterion-referenced assessment.

Studies in Educational Evaluation, 12(3), 257-265.

McClarty, K.L., & Gaertner, M.N. (2015, April). Measuring Mastery: Best Practices for

Assessment In Competency‐based Education, American Enterprise Institute. Retrieved

April 2017, from www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/measuring‐mastery.pdf

McClenney, K. M. (1998). Community colleges perched at the millennium: Perspectives on

innovation, transformation, and tomorrow. Leadership Abstracts, 11(8).

McKay, D. (2017, December 17). We must do more now to prepare young people for the future

of work. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved December 17, 2017, from

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-buisness/rob-commentary/we-must-do-

more-now-to-prepare-young-people-for-the-future-of-work/articles37360334

McKenna, S., & Quinn, L. (2020). Misconceptions and misapplications of student-centered

approaches. In Hoidn, S., & Klemenčič, M. (Eds), The Routledge International

Handbook of Student-Centered Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (1st

ed., pp. 109-120).

McKernan, J. (1996). Curriculum action research: A handbook of methods and resources

for the reflective practitioner (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page.

 259

McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and practice. London:

Routledge Falmer.

McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2011). All you need to know about action research. Second

Edition. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

McNiff, J. (2014). Writing and doing action research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

McNiff, J. (2016). Writing up your action research project. [electronic resource]. London ; New

York, NY : Routledge.

Meakin, K. (2012). How can we nurture and develop creativity in first year design students, Irish

Journal of Academic Practice, (1)1, Article 4, http://arrow.dit.ie/ijap/vol1/iss1/4

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed.). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and

implementation. 4th Edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., & Grenier, R. S. (2019). Qualitative research in practice: examples for discussion

and Analysis. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Miles, C. L., & Wilson, C. (2004). Learning Outcomes for the Twenty-first Century: Cultivating

Student Success for College and the Knowledge Economy. New Directions for

Community Colleges, 2004(126), 87-100.

Morcke, A. M., Dornan, T., & Eika, B. (2012, September 18). Outcomes-based (competency)

based education: An explanation of its origins, theoretical basis, and empirical evidence.

Advances in Health Sciences Education. DOI 10.1007/s10459-012-9405-9

 260

Mousavi Hejazi, B. (2016). Retention initiative report. Toronto: George Brown College,

Unpublished Report.

Mousavi Hejazi, B., & Borja de Mozota, B. (2015, April 22-24). Value of design competencies

within an outcomes-based education [Paper presentation]. 11th European Academy of

Design Conference, Paris, France.

Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and

innovation. American Psychological Association; 1(103), 27- 43.

Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson S. B. (2007). Creative thought: Cognition and problem solving in

a dynamic system. Creativity Research Handbook, 2, 33–77.

Mumford, M. D., Martin, R., Elliot, S., & McIntosh T. (2018). Creative thinking in the real

world: Processing in context. In R. J. Stenberg & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The nature of

human creativity (pp. 147–165). Cambridge University Press.

OECD. (2008). Tertiary education for the knowledge society. (Vol. 1). Paris: Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

OECD. (2019, April). PISA 2021 Creative thinking framework (Third draft).

https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA-2021-Creative-Thinking-

Framework.pdf

Ocvirk, O., Stinson, R., Wigg, P., Bone, R., & Cayton, D. (2012). Art fundamentals: Theory

and practice (12th Edition). Toronto: McGraw-Hill.

Oliver, B. (2011). Assuring graduate outcomes. (ALTC funded project report). Retrieved July

2011, from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-assuring-graduate-outcomes-curtin-2011

Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking (3rd

ed.). New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Patrick, C. (1937). Creative thoughts in artists. The Journal of Psychology, (4)1, 33–34.
 261

doi: 10.1080/00223980.1937.9917525

Pichette, J. (2019, November 6). Competency-based education: A model for keeping up in

Canada. The EvoLLLution. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from

https://evolllution.com/revenue-streams/market_opportunities/competency-based-

education-a-model-for-keeping-up-in-canada/

Pichette, J., & Watkins, E. K. (2018). Competency-based education: Driving the skills-

management agenda. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Philip, R. (2013). Cultivating creative ecologies: Creative teaching and teaching for creativity. In

S. Frielick, N. Buissink-Smith, P. Wyse, J. Billot, J. Hallas, E. Whitehead, (Eds.) Research

and Development in higher education: The place of learning and teaching, 36 (pp. 360 –

369). Auckland, New Zealand.

Reason, P. (1994). Three approaches to participatory inquiry. In N. Denzen & Y. Lincoln

(Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 324-339). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.

Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2004). Learning domains and the process of creativity. The Australian

Educational Researcher, (31) 2, n.p.

Reigeluth, C. & Myers, R. & Lee, D. (2016). The learner-centered paradigm of

education (181). Retrieved July 19, 2021, from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306575155_The_learner-

centered_paradigm_of_education_181

Reiter-Palmon, R., & E. Robinson (2009). Problem identification and construction: What do we

know, what is the future?. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(1), 43–47.

Royal College of Art (1979). Design in general education, Department of Design Research,

Royal College of Art, London, UK.

 262

Runco, M. A. (1986). Divergent thinking and creative performance in gifted and nongifted

children. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 375–384.

Runco, M. A. (2018). Authentic creativity: Mechanisms, definitions, and empirical efforts.

In R. J. Stenberg & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The nature of human creativity (pp. 246–

263). Cambridge University Press.

Runco, M. A., & Dow, G. (1999). Problem finding. In A. Runco and S. R. Pritzker (Eds.),

Encyclopedia of Creativity, (Vol. 2, pp. 433–435). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Runco, M. A. & Jaeger, G. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research

Journal, 24, 92–96.

Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Cramond B. (2011). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking

as predictors of personal and public achievement: A 50 year follow up. Creativity

Research Journal, 22, 361–368.

Savic, M., & Kashef, M. (2013). Learning outcomes in affective domain within contemporary

architectural curricula. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, (23),

987-1004. doi: 10.1007/s10798-013-9238-8

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. NY: Basic

Books.

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.

Simonton, D. K. (1997). Political pathology and social creativity. In M. A. Runco, & R. Richards

(Eds.), Eminent creativity, everyday creativity, and health (pp. 359–377). Greenwich,

CT: Ablex.

Simpson, E. J. (1972). The classification of educational objectives in the Psychomotor Domain.

Washington, DC: Gryphon House.

Smith, Mark K. (1995). Developing critical communities of practice, Groupwork pp. 134 –
 263

151, Available in the informal education archives:

/http://www.infed.org/archives/jeffs_and_smith/smith_critical_conversations.htm.

Spady, W.G. (1977). Competency Based Education: A Bandwagon in Search of a Definition.

Educational Researcher, Vol.6 No. 1, pp. 9-14.

Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based education. Critical Issues and Answers. Arlington.

American Association of School Administrators.

Spady, W. (2020). Outcomes-Based Education’s Empowering Essence: Elevating Learning for

an Awakening World. Boulder, Colorado: Mason Works Press.

Spady, W. G., & Marshall, K. (1991). Beyond Traditional Outcome-Based Education. Retrieved

July 20, 2021 from

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199110_spady.pdf

Stake, R. (1986). An evolutionary view of educational improvement. In E. R. House

(Ed.), New directions in educational evaluation (pp. 89-102). London: Falmer Press.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Stanko-Kaczmarek, M. (2012, November 16). The effect of intrinsic motivation on the affect and

evaluation of the creative process among fine arts students. Creativity research journal,

(24)4, 304–310. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.730003

Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London:

Guilford.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of

conformity. New York: Free Press.

Tanggard, L., & V. Glaveanu (2014). Creativity assessment as intervention: The case-study of

creative learning. Academic Quarter, 9(1), 18–30.

 264

Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance tests of creative thinking-norms- technical manual research

edition-verbal tests, forms A and B- figural tests, forms A and B. Princeton: Personnel

Press.

Tripp, D. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing professional judgement. New York:

Routledge.

Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The University of

Chicago Press.

Visocky J. & K. (2013). Design currency: Understand, define, and promote the value of your

design work. Toronto: Pearson Education.

Vorhees, R. A. (2001, Summer). Competency-based learning models: A necessary future. New

Directions for Institutional Research, 110. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wallach, M., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children. New York: Holt,

Rinehart & Winston.

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and Company.

Watson, S. L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2008, August). The learner – centered paradigm of education.

Educational Technology, 137(42-48). Retrieved July 19, 2021, from

file:///Users/baharmousavihejazi/Downloads/129Learner-Centered-EdTech3%20(1).pdf

Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice (2nd ed.).

CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wheelahan, L., & Moodie, G. (2005). Separate post-compulsory education sectors within

a liberal market economy: interesting models generated by the Australian anomaly. In J.

Gallacher, & M. Osborne, (Eds.), A contested landscape: International perspectives on

diversity in mass higher education. Leicester: NIACE.

 265

Wheelahan, L. M. (2007, September). How competency-based training locks the working class

out of powerful knowledge: A modified Bernsteinian analysis. British Journal of Sociology

of Education. 28(5), 637-651. DOI: 10.1080/01425690701505540

Willems, E. P., & Raush, H. L. (1969). In E. P. Willems, & H. L. Raush (Eds.), Naturalistic

viewpoints in psychological research (pp. 44-71). New York: Holt, Rinehart and

Winston.

Wilson, C. D., Miles, C. L., Baker, R. L., & Schoenberger, R. L. (2000). Learning outcomes

for the 21st century: Report of a community college study. Mission Viejo, California:

League for Innovation in the Community College.

Weingarten, H., Drummond, D., & Finnie, R. (2015, October 27). Canada needs a new skills

agenda. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario. Retrieved October 27, 2015, from

blog‐en.heqco.ca/2015/10/harvey‐weingarten‐don‐drummond‐ross‐finnie‐canada‐needs‐

a‐new‐skills‐agenda/

Western University, Centre for Teaching and Learning. (n.d.). Backward Course Design: Adapted

from Reflections Articles by Wendy Crocker. Retrieved July 19, 2021, from

https://teaching.uwo.ca/curriculum/coursedesign/backward-design.html

Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind’

“how do I improve my practice?”. Cambridge Journal of Education, 19 (1), 137–153.

Woods, P. (1993). Critical events in teaching and learning. Bristol, Pa: Falmer Press.

Wycoff, J. (1991). Mindmapping: Your personal guide to exploring creativity and problem-

solving. New York: Berkley Books.

Yazan, B. (2015, February). Three approaches to case study methods: Yin, Merriam, and Stake.

The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134–152. DOI: 10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2102

 266

Yin, R. K. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications. London: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Yokochi, S., & Okada, T. (2005). Creative cognitive process of art making: a field study of a

traditional Chinese ink painter. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2-3), 241–255.

Young, M. (2007). Qualifications frameworks: Some conceptual issues. European Journal of

Education 42(4), 445–457.

Zeni, J. (1998). A guide to ethical issues and action research. Educational Action

Research, 6(1), 9-19. DOI: 10.1080/09650799800200053.

 APPENDIX A
Administrative
Consent

OISE
ONTARIO INSTITUTE
FOR STUDIES IN
EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF
TORONTO

Date: June 14, 2015

To: Director, Research and Innovation

George Brown College

From: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi

Re: Request to name the Design

Management Program at the
Centre forArts, Design and
Informatics/School of Design,
George Brown College in my
PhD dissertation

Title of the Research Study: Implementation of Outcomes-

Based Education in an
InterdisciplinaryDesign Course and
Curriculum: An Action Research
Study.

Researchers: I am conducting this research in partial fulfillment for

a PhD degree in Higher Education in the Department of
Leadership, Higher and Adult Education at OISE/University of
Toronto. My thesis supervisor is Dr. Katharine Janzen, OISE.

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
267
 268

Design Management is a new interdisciplinary field in the realm of design

education and plays a crucial role in enabling designers to become strategic
thinkers within a fast-paced and competitive business environment. My research
will explore the knowledge, skills and competencies needed for graduates to
acquire and demonstrate upon completion of this program of study. I also intend
to investigate the quality of my teaching within outcomes-based education as well
as in interaction with my colleagues at both program and institutional levels. My
research methodology is a qualitative approach using 'action research' as my
strategy of inquiry (Please see Appendix A for a more detailed description of the
research).

Benefits of the Research to Your Institution: The Design Management Program

at the School of Design in George Brown College is a unique one-year post-
graduate program in Ontario, which attracts both national and international
students from all design disciplines. I have been teaching "Research and
Development Issues" and "Major Project" in this program since 2008 and have
developed a strong understanding of this interdisciplinary field.

In addition to dissemination of the findings related to the scholarship of

teaching and learning in design education, I believe that the findings of this
study will support me in my current teaching endeavor and will help me to play
a more effective role in the formulation and implementation of learning
outcomes at the program level. Regarding the uniqueness of this program, I
also intend to provide decision-makers at managerial levels with a better
understanding of the existing issues regarding the integration of a learner-
centered approach to design curriculum, with a synthesis of best practices at
the School of Design, George Brown College.

Questions about the Research: If you have any questions about the
research please feel free to contact me, or my thesis supervisor.

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi, PhD Art Katharine Janzen,

Study, Ed.D. Higher
B.A. & M.A. Industrial Design, Education, OISE/UT
ACIDO Professor, George R6-264, 252 Bloor St. W., Toronto ON
Brown College M5S
1V6
Email: Katharine.janzen@utoro
[email protected] nto.ca
a Cell phone: 647-302-0734 phone:416-978-1232

Administrative Consent
 269

I, Dawn Davidson, consent to the naming of George Brown College in the

reporting of the findings in the research study titled 'Implementation of Outcomes-

Based Education in an Interdisciplinary Design Course and Curriculum: An Action

Research Study' conducted by Bahar Mousavi Hejazi as described above.

Name Dawn Davidson

Signature Date 2015/06/15

Director, Research and Innovation

Name of Institution: George Brown College

Please keep a copy of this consent for your record

 270

APPENDIX B

Informed Consent Form – Student Participants

OISE
ONTARIO INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Date

Dear students,

I am conducting a research project titled “Implementation of Outcomes- Based Education in an

Interdisciplinary Design Course and Curriculum: An Action Research Study” which I am completing
as a doctoral candidate at the University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree in Higher Education. Dr. Katharine Janzen
of the Department of Higher, Adult Education is my Thesis Supervisor.

In this study, I intend to reflect on my teaching practice in the ‘Design Process’ course that I teach at
the Art and Design Foundation program at the School of Design based on the principles of
outcomes-based education using action research as my method of inquiry. The main goal of my
research is to improve my teaching practice and share the results of my study with my colleagues at
George Brown College for curriculum development. I will also collect data through observation,
reflection, survey/questionnaire, both formal and informal conversation, and interview.

The research study will take place within the 2017/2018 calendar year. Because you are a student in
this course, I invite you to participate in this research study aspect. Since you have registered for this
course regular participation in all class activities in this course is required for academic purposes.
However, although your participation in this study will contribute to the body of knowledge in design
education, your participation in this activity for the purposes of the study only is completely voluntary,
and to the best of my knowledge, there are no potential risks or harm to you. Your participation (or
not) and will not affect in any way your learning experience or the evaluation of your work in this
course or in y our program. A summary of the final results from this study will be shared with you
once the study is completed.

Participation in research study aspects of this course involves:

i. Recognizing that I will be observing class interactions for the purposes of personal
reflections on my teaching activities.
ii. Allowing me to take relevant photographs of students engaged in in-class learning activities
and projects: these photos will be used primarily for the purposes of my reflection and
analysis of my own actions. If I use photos of students in any reporting or presentation of
my findings, I will do so only by explicit consent of each student. Faces of students who

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 271

i. do not consent to this will be greyed out/masked so that they are not identifiable in any
photos used.
ii. Completion of an anonymous Critical Incident Questionnaire: The CIQ questionnaire
will take approximately 15 minutes to complete and will be distributed at the end of the
initial class session in the classroom. Please complete this survey during the allotted
class time and deposit the completed questionnaire (or blank if you do not wish to
complete it) in the sealed box that will be provided in the classroom. In the event that you
wish to withdraw from the study, I will not be able to delete any information you have
submitted since the Questionnaire is anonymous.
iii. Allowing me to analyze your student project, including all the components of your
process-work and your final work for the purposes of this study.
iv. I will credit individual students for their projects by name, ONLY if they provide specific
consent
to do so.
All the data collected will be kept confidential and secure in hard copy or digitally on my
password protected computer, encrypted in compliance with University of Toronto policies. The
data will be accessible only to me and to my Thesis Supervisor. But you should know that this
research study may be reviewed for quality assurance to make sure that the required laws and
guidelines are followed. If chosen, (a) representative(s) of the Human Research Ethics Program
(HREP) may access study-related data and/or consent materials as part of the review. All information
accessed by the HREP will be upheld to the same level of confidentiality that has been stated by the
research team.”
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me by any means or my Thesis
Supervisor at [email protected] or 416 978-1232.
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the University
of Toronto Research Ethics Board at [email protected] or 416-946-3273 or the Research
Ethics Board at George Brown College at [email protected]
If you have had all your questions answered and agree to participate in this study please indicate
your consents below and keep a copy of this Informed Consent Form.

Sincerely

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi Katharine Janzen, Ed.D.

PhD Candidate Thesis Supervisor
OISE, University of Toronto Leadership, Higher and Adult
Education
[email protected] OISE/University of Toronto
416-415-5000 ex. 3379 [email protected]
Phone 416 -978-1232
 272

Student Participation Consent

I confirm that I have read and fully understand what is asked of me for participation in the research
study as described above, I have had an opportunity to ask any questions I had, and I agree to
participate in this research study as indicated below:

Name of student: _______________________________________

Signed: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Student’s signature

I consent to (please initial);

i. Being observed in class ________
ii. Photographs of my in-class activities and projects: __
iii. Completing the Critical Incident Questionnaire (hard copy) ___________
iv. Analysis of my projects and communications/documents for the purposes of this study
________

v. To be identified by name and given credit for any of my activities or projects __________

Thank-you. Please keep a copy of this form for your records.

 273

Appendix Bi
Critical Incident Questionnaire for Students to Complete
(Paper)
1. At what moment during this project did you feel most engaged with what was happening?

2. What action that anyone (teacher or student) took in class during this project did you find
most affirming and helpful?

3. What about this project surprised you the most? (this could be something about your own
reactions to what went on, or something that someone did, or anything else that occurred
to you.)
 274

APPENDIX C

Letter / Email
Informed Consent for Participation of the Interested Observer

OISE
ONTARIO INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Date

Dear Graduate,

I am conducting a research project titled “Implementation of Outcomes- Based Education in an

Interdisciplinary Design Course and Curriculum: An Action Research Study” which I am completing
as a doctoral candidate at the University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree in Higher Education. Dr. Katharine Janzen
of the Department of Higher, Adult Education is my Thesis Supervisor.

In this study, I intend to reflect on my teaching practice in the ‘Design Process’ course that I teach at
the Art and Design Foundation program at the School of Design based on the principles of
outcomes-based education using action research as my method of inquiry. The main goal of my
research is to improve my teaching practice and share the results of my study with my colleagues at
George Brown College for curriculum development. I will also collect data through observation,
reflection, survey/questionnaire, both formal and informal conversation, and interview. As you are a
graduate of this program, I would like to invite you to participate in this study by attending one of the
following sessions of this course on DAYs/DATEs/TIMEs, observing the dynamic of the classroom
and completing a hard copy of a questionnaire that I will give you in the beginning of the session.
Please find attached a digital copy of the questionnaire for your information.

The research will take place within the 2017/2018 calendar year. The session I am inviting you to will
be take about 3 hours and the questionnaire will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. I would
greatly appreciate if you then complete the digital survey in your own time based, on your
observations and notes that you take during the session. Please send me the completed
questionnaire as an attached document to your email one week after the session. Your input will
remain confidential, kept in a locked and secured location, accessible only to me and my Thesis
Supervisor. All data will be destroyed at the conclusion of this study or upon your withdrawal.
Specific identifiable information will not be used in any reports or publications unless you are
specifically consent to be identified in the study. The final results from this study will be shared with
you.

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 275

Although your participation is important and will contribute to the body of knowledge in design
education, your participation is completely voluntary and to the best of my knowledge, there are
no potential risks of harm to you. You may withdraw from this study by contacting me by any
means. If you withdraw before data aggregation is begun, your information will be deleted from
the study – after that it will not be possible to delete it.
All the data collected will be kept confidential and secure in hard copy or digitally on my
password protected computer, encrypted in compliance with University of Toronto policies. The
data will be accessible only to me and to my Thesis Supervisor. But you should know that this
research study may be reviewed for quality assurance to make sure that the required laws and
guidelines are followed. If chosen, (a) representative(s) of the Human Research Ethics Program
(HREP) may access study-related data and/or consent materials as part of the review. All
information accessed by the HREP will be upheld to the same level of confidentiality that has
been stated by the research team.
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me by any means or my Thesis
Supervisor at [email protected] or 416 978-1232.
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Toronto Research Ethics Board at [email protected] or 416-946-3273 or
the Research Ethics Board at George Brown College at [email protected]
If you have had all your questions answered and agree to participate in this study as described
above, please indicate your consent below and keep a copy of this Informed Consent Form.
Sincerely

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi Katharine Janzen, Ed.D.

PhD Candidate Thesis Supervisor
OISE, University of Toronto Leadership, Higher and Adult
Education
[email protected] OISE/University of Toronto
416-415-5000 ex. 3379
[email protected]
416 -978-1232

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae

Consent to Participate as an Interested Observer

I confirm that I have read and fully understand what is asked of me for participation in the
research study as described above, I have had an opportunity to ask any questions I had, and I
agree to participate in this research study:

Name: _______________________________________
 276

Signed: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Signature

I consent to be identified by name in the reporting of the findings Yes_____

No_______
 277

APPENDIX Ci
Questionnaire for Interested Observer

The following are sample questions; additional related questions and non-leading
probes may be asked in order to gain a deep understanding of the Interested
Observer’s insights.

1. At what moment during this session did you feel students were most engaged with what
was happening?

2. What action that anyone (teacher or student) took in class during the session did you find
most affirming and helpful to student engagement/learning?

3. What about this session surprised you the most? (This could be something about your
own reactions to what went on, or something that someone did, or anything else that
occurred to you.)
 278

APPENDIX D

Letter / Email
Informed Consent for Participation of the Critical Expert

OISE
ONTARIO INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Date

Dear Expert,

I am conducting a research project titled “Implementation of Outcomes- Based Education in an

Interdisciplinary Design Course and Curriculum: An Action Research Study” which I am completing
as a doctoral candidate at the University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree in Higher Education. Dr. Katharine Janzen
of the Department of Higher, Adult Education is my Thesis Supervisor.

In this study, I intend to reflect on my teaching practice in the ‘Design Process’ course that I teach at
the Art and Design Foundation program at the School of Design based on the principles of
outcomes-based education using action research as my method of inquiry. The main goal of my
research is to improve my teaching practice and share the results of my study with my colleagues at
George Brown College for curriculum development. I will also collect data through observation,
reflection, survey/questionnaire, both formal and informal conversation, and interview. As you are a
curriculum specialist at George Brown College, I would like to meet with you and discuss my
research for your expert opinion. Please find attached relevant documents of my study.

The research will take place within the 2017/2018 calendar year. The session will take approximately
60 minutes and with your consent I will audio-record our conversation and take notes. The audio-
recordings will be erased immediately after the transcription of the interview. Your comments will
remain confidential, kept in a locked and secured location accessible only to my thesis Supervisor
and me, and will be destroyed at the conclusion of this study. A pseudonym will be used and you
will not be identifiable in any reports or publications unless you explicitly consent to be identified in
the study. I will share a summary of the results from this study with you when it is completed.

Although your participation is extremely important to contribute to the body of knowledge in design
education, your participation is completely voluntary and to the best of my knowledge, there are no
potential risks of harm to you. You may withdraw from this study by letting me know by means until

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 279

data aggregation is begun, and all the information you provided will be deleted. If you withdraw
after data aggregation is begun it will not be possible to delete any interview data.
All the data collected will be kept confidential and secure in hard copy or digitally on my
password protected computer, encrypted in compliance with University of Toronto policies. The
data will be accessible only to me and to my Thesis Supervisor. But you should know that this
research study may be reviewed for quality assurance to make sure that the required laws and
guidelines are followed. If chosen, (a) representative(s) of the Human Research Ethics Program
(HREP) may access study-related data and/or consent materials as part of the review. All
information accessed by the HREP will be upheld to the same level of confidentiality that has
been stated by the research team.
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me by any means or my Thesis
Supervisor at [email protected] or 416 978-1232.
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Toronto Research Ethics Board at [email protected] or 416-946-3273 or
the Research Ethics Board at George Brown College at [email protected]
If you have had all your questions answered and agree to participate in this study as described
above, please indicate your consent below and keep a copy of this Informed Consent Form.
Sincerely

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi Katharine Janzen, Ed.D.

PhD Candidate Thesis Supervisor
OISE, University of Toronto Leadership, Higher and Adult
Education
[email protected] OISE/University of Toronto
416-415-5000 ex. 3379
[email protected]
Phone 416 -978-1232

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 280

Consent to Participate as Critical Expert

I confirm that I have read and fully understand what is asked of me for participation in the research
study as described above, I have had an opportunity to ask any questions I had, and I agree to
participate in this research study:

Name: _______________________________________

Signed: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Signature

Please initial your response:

I consent to the audio-recording of the interview Yes_____ No_______

I consent to be identified by name in the reporting of the findings Yes_____ No_______

 281

Appendix Di
APPENDIX Di
Guideline
Conversation forGuide
Informal–Conversation/Question
Critical Expert
With the Critical Expert

This will be an open-ended conversation and other questions will arise from my primary questions which is:

In your opinion, how can I improve my teaching based on the constructive alignment of ‘intended learning
outcomes, ‘learning activities’ and ‘assessment tools’ in my course?

[As needed I will also use non-leading probes to gain a deeper understanding of some of the Expert’s
comments]
 282

APPENDIX E

Informed Consent for Critical Administrator

OISE
ONTARIO INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Date

Dear Colleague,

I am conducting a research project titled “Implementation of Outcomes- Based Education in an

Interdisciplinary Design Course and Curriculum: An Action Research Study” which I am completing
as a doctoral candidate at the University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree in Higher Education. Dr. Katharine Janzen
of the Department of Higher, Adult Education is my Thesis Supervisor.

In this study, I intend to reflect on my teaching practice in the ‘Design Process’ course that I teach at
the Art and Design Foundation program at the School of Design based on the principles of
outcomes-based education using action research as my method of inquiry. The main goal of my
research is to improve my teaching practice and share the results of my study with my colleagues at
George Brown College for curriculum development. I will also collect data through observation,
reflection, survey/questionnaire, both formal and informal conversation, and interview. I am inviting
you to participate in one individual meeting with me and one reflective group discussion related to
this study.

The research will take place within the 2017/2018 calendar year. Unless you give explicit consent to
be named, only pseudonyms will be used and no participant will be identifiable in any reporting of
the findings. Participation is completely voluntary and you are free to decline to answer any
question(s) you do not wish to answer, and to the best of my knowledge, there are no potential risks
of harm to you.

The individual meeting as well as the group discussion and brainstorming session with my peers will
each take place for about one hour, between May and November 2017. The group discussion will be
audio-recorded but only with your explicit consent; the audio-recording will be erased immediately
after transcription of the group discussion. Only aggregate (group) data will be reported by the
researchers. With your explicit consent, also, I will be taking photographs of the discussion group for
analysis purposes. Any participant who does not agree to be photographed will have their face
blocked out/masked if I use these photos in any reporting or presentation of the findings. You are

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 283

free to withdraw from the study simply by leaving the group discussion without explanation.
However, since this is a group discussion, your previously provided information cannot be deleted
from the data.
All the data collected will be kept confidential and secure in hard copy or digitally on my password
protected computer, encrypted in compliance with University of Toronto policies. The data will be
accessible only to me and to my Thesis Supervisor. But you should know that this research study
may be reviewed for quality assurance to make sure that the required laws and guidelines are followed. If
chosen, (a) representative(s) of the Human Research Ethics Program (HREP) may access study-related
data and/or consent materials as part of the review. All information accessed by the HREP will be upheld
to the same level of confidentiality that has been stated by the research team.
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me by any means or my Thesis
Supervisor at [email protected] or 416 978-1232.
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the University
of Toronto Research Ethics Board at [email protected] or 416-946-3273 or the Research
Ethics Board at George Brown College at [email protected].
If you have had all your questions answered and agree to participate in this study as described
above, please indicate your consent below and keep a copy of this Informed Consent Form.

Sincerely

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi Katharine Janzen, Ed.D.

PhD Candidate Thesis Supervisor
OISE, University of Toronto Leadership, Higher and Adult
Education
[email protected] OISE/University of Toronto
Phone 416-415-5000 ex. 3379 [email protected]
Phone 416 -978-1232

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 284

Consent to Participate as Critical Administrator

I confirm that I have read and fully understand what is asked of me for participation in the research
study as described above, I have had an opportunity to ask any questions I had, and I agree to
participate in this research study:

Name: _______________________________________

Signed: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Signature

Please initial your response:

I consent to the audio-recording of the interview Yes_____ No_______

I consent to be identified by name in the reporting of the findings Yes_____ No_______

 285

Appendix Ei
APPENDIX Ei
Guide for Interview with the Critical Administrator
Guide for Administrator Interview

The following are sample questions; additional related questions and non-leading probes may be asked
in order to gain a deep understanding of the Administrator’s insights.

1. What are the current institutional strategies that can facilitate my contribution as a part-time
faculty to the implementation of outcomes-based education at program/institutional level(s)?

2. What are the policies and procedures for recognizing quality teaching and learning as
institutional priority?

3. In your opinion, what future institutional strategies/tools can increase faculty engagement in the
improvement of quality of teaching and learning?
 286

APPPENDIX F

Informed Consent for Reflective Group Discussion

OISE
ONTARIO INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Date

Dear Colleague,

I am conducting a research project titled “Implementation of Outcomes- Based Education in an

Interdisciplinary Design Course and Curriculum: An Action Research Study” which I am completing
as a doctoral candidate at the University of Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree in Higher Education. Dr. Katharine Janzen
of the Department of Higher, Adult Education is my Thesis Supervisor.

In this study, I intend to reflect on my teaching practice in the ‘Design Process’ course that I teach at
the Art and Design Foundation program at the School of Design based on the principles of
outcomes-based education using action research as my method of inquiry. The main goal of my
research is to improve my teaching practice and share the results of my study with my colleagues at
George Brown College for curriculum development. I will also collect data through observation,
reflection, survey/questionnaire, both formal and informal conversation, and interview. I am inviting
you to participate in one individual meeting with me and one reflective group discussion related to
this study.

The research will take place within the 2017/2018 calendar year. Unless you give explicit consent to
be named, only pseudonyms will be used and no participant will be identifiable in any reporting of
the findings. Participation is completely voluntary and you are free to decline to answer any
question(s) you do not wish to answer, and to the best of my knowledge, there are no potential risks
of harm to you.

The individual meeting as well as the group discussion and brainstorming session with my peers will
each take place for about one hour, between May and November 2017. The group discussion will be
audio-recorded but only with your explicit consent; the audio-recording will be erased immediately
after transcription of the group discussion. Only aggregate (group) data will be reported by the
researchers. With your explicit consent, also, I will be taking photographs of the discussion group for
analysis purposes. Any participant who does not agree to be photographed will have their face
blocked out/masked if I use these photos in any reporting or presentation of the findings. You are

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 287

free to withdraw from the study simply by leaving the group discussion without explanation.
However, since this is a group discussion, your previously provided information cannot be deleted
from the data.
All the data collected will be kept confidential and secure in hard copy or digitally on my password
protected computer, encrypted in compliance with University of Toronto policies. The data will be
accessible only to me and to my Thesis Supervisor. But you should know that this research study
may be reviewed for quality assurance to make sure that the required laws and guidelines are followed. If
chosen, (a) representative(s) of the Human Research Ethics Program (HREP) may access study-related
data and/or consent materials as part of the review. All information accessed by the HREP will be upheld
to the same level of confidentiality that has been stated by the research team.
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me by any means or my Thesis
Supervisor at [email protected] or 416 978-1232.
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the University
of Toronto Research Ethics Board at [email protected] or 416-946-3273 or the Research
Ethics Board at George Brown College at [email protected]
If you have had all your questions answered and agree to participate in this study as described
above, please indicate your consent below and keep a copy of this Informed Consent Form.

Sincerely

Bahar Mousavi Hejazi Katharine Janzen, Ed.D.

PhD Candidate Thesis Supervisor
OISE, University of Toronto Leadership, Higher and Adult
Education
[email protected] OISE/University of Toronto
416-415-5000 ex. 3379 [email protected]
Phone 416 -978-1232

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
252 Bloor Street West, 6th and 7th Floor
Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6 Canada
www.oise.utoronto.ca/lhae
 288

Consent to Participate in a Reflective Group Discussion

I confirm that I have read and fully understand what is asked of me for participation in the research
study as described above, I have had an opportunity to ask any questions I had, and I agree to
participate in this research study:

Name: _______________________________________

Signed: _________________________________________ Date: ____________________

Signature

Please initial your response:

I consent to the audio-recording of the meetings Yes_____ No_______

I consent to be photographed in the group discussion Yes ____ No_______

I consent to be identified by name in the reporting of the findings Yes_____ No_______

 289

Appendix Fi

SWOC Analysis Questionnaire

(Paper)

For Faculty/Reflection Group Discussion

What are the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges that you are facing in the implementation
of learning-centered teaching methods in the Art and Design Foundation program?
Strengths Weaknesses

Opportunities Challenges
 290

Appendix Fii

Guide for Faculty Reflection Group Session

Script:
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this group discussion and brainstorming session. I will
review the man points of the Consent Form that you all signed.
• Participation in this study is completely voluntary and you are free to decline to answer any
question(s) you do not wish to answer.
• You have consented to have this discussion audio-recorded.
• You have consented to have photographs take of this discussion group – if not, your face bill be
blacked out on any photos.
• Only non-identifiable pseudonyms will be used unless you gave explicit consent to be named.
• You are free to withdraw from the study by simply leaving this session without explanation
anytime but because this is a group discussion your previous comments cannot be deleted.

Discussion: SOAR Analysis (Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations and Results)

Strengths – 10 minutes

• What are our achievements in the implementation of learning-centered methods in the Art
and Design Foundation program?

Opportunities – 10 minutes

• How can we reframe perceived challenges to be seen as opportunities?

Aspirations – 10 minutes

• What actions should we take as teachers to improve the quality of teaching and learning in
this program?

Results – 10 minutes

• What are the 3-5 key goals that we should consider to achieve the desired future
improvements?

Ideation/Brainstorming – 15 minutes

• What are your ideas in reaching these goals?

Wrap-up – 15 minutes

• Final comments/Next actions

 291

APPENDIX G
G108 Course List and Prerequisites

G108 COURSES

SEMESTER 1

Code Course Name

ART1019 Foundation Drawing I: Observational Drawing and Composition

ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space
ART1029 Introduction to Digital Media
ART1030 Introduction to Photography
ART1031 Art Culture
COMM1007 College English
SEMESTER 2

Code Course Name

ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice

ART1036 Art and Design Portfolio Showcase
DESN1020 Design Process
Electives (Any
3)
ART1024 Foundation Drawing II: Life Drawing

ART1040 Painting and Mixed Media Studio

ART1025 3D Materials and Techniques

ART1035 Advanced Digital Media
ART1033 Multimedia Storytelling
ART1043 Photography: People, Concepts and Stories
DESN1084 2D Digital Art 1 (dual credit with Game Art)
 292

G108 PREREQUISITES
Second Semester Courses

Mandatory Courses:
Course: ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory and Practice
Prerequisite: ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space

Course: ART1036 Art and Design Portfolio Showcase

Prerequisite: ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space
And
Prerequisite: ART1029 Introduction to Digital Media

Course: DESN1020 Design Process

Prerequisite: ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form and Space

Electives: (Any 3 courses can be selected)

Course: ART1024 Foundation Drawing II: Life Drawing
Prerequisite: ART1019 Foundation Drawing I: Observational Drawing and Composition

Course: ART1040 Painting and Mixed Media Studio

Prerequisite: ART1019 Foundation Drawing I: Observational Drawing and Composition

Course: ART1025 3D Materials and Techniques

Prerequisite: None

Course: ART1035 Advanced Digital Media

Prerequisite: ART1029 Introduction to Digital Media

Course: ART1033 Multimedia Storytelling

Prerequisite: ART1029 Introduction to Digital Media

Course: ART1043 Photography: People, Concepts and Stories

Prerequisite: ART1030 Introduction to Photography

Course: DESN1084 2D Digital Art 1 (Students who will be accepted in Game Art will receive
an equivalent credit for this course).
Prerequisite: None

*English Courses: Be advised that the English courses are administered by the department
of English which does not operate under the School of Design.

Course: COMM 1007

Prerequisite: COMM 1003 or CESL 1003 or PEN1 or PENX
 293

APPENDIX Gi
Course Outline Sample

SCHOOL OF
COURSE NAME:
COURSE CODE:
CREDIT HOURS:
PREREQUISITES:
COREQUISITES:
PLAR ELIGIBLE: YES (X) NO ( )
EFFECTIVE DATE: _______________
PROFESSOR: _____________________OFFICE #: _______________________
PHONE: __________________________EMAIL: _________________________
NOTE TO STUDENTS: Academic Departments at George Brown College will NOT
retain historical copies of Course Outlines. We urge you to retain this Course Outline for
your future reference.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

ORIGINATOR (SIGNATURE): ___________________________________ DATE:

_____________________

CHAIR (SIGNATURE): _________________________________________ DATE: _____________________

DATE OF REVISION: _________________________________________________

EQUITY STATEMENT: George Brown College values the talents and contributions of its students, staff and
community partners and seeks to create a welcoming environment where equity, diversity and safety of all
groups are fundamental. Language or activities which are inconsistent with this philosophy violate the College
policy on the Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment and will not be tolerated. The commitment and
cooperation of all students and staff are required to maintain this environment. Information and assistance
are available through your Chair, Student Affairs, the Student Association or the Human Rights Advisor.
George Brown College is dedicated to reducing barriers and providing equal access to education for
students with disabilities. If you require academic accommodations, please contact the Accessible Learning
Services office on your campus.
 294

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES: Students should obtain a copy of the Student Handbook and refer to it for
additional information regarding the grading system, withdrawals, exemptions, class assignments, missed
tests and exams, supplemental privileges, and academic dishonesty. Students are required to apply
themselves diligently to the course of study, and to prepare class and homework assignments as given. Past
student performance shows a strong relationship between regular attendance and success.

COURSE DESCRIPTION:

ESSENTIAL EMPLOYABILITY SKILLS:

As mandated by the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development, essential
employability skills (EES) will be addressed throughout all programs of study. Students will have the
opportunity to learn (L) specific skills, to practice (P) these skills, and/or be evaluated (E) on the
EES outcomes in a variety of courses. The EES include communication, numeracy, critical thinking
& problem solving, information management, interpersonal and personal skills. The faculty for this
course has indicated which of the EES are either Learned (L), Practiced (P) or Evaluated (E) in this
course:
Skill L P E Skill L P E
1. communicate clearly, concisely 7. locate, select, organize and
and correctly in the written, document information
spoken and visual form that using appropriate
fulfills the purpose and meets technology and
the needs of the audience information sources
2. respond to written, spoken or 8. show respect for the diverse
visual messages in a manner opinions, values, belief
that ensures effective systems, and
communication contributions of others
3. execute mathematical 9. interact with others in
operations accurately groups or teams in ways
that contribute to
effective working
relationships and the
achievement of goals
4. apply a systematic approach to 10. manage the use of time
solve problems and other resources to
complete projects
5. use a variety of thinking skills 11. take responsibility for
to anticipate and solve one’s own actions,
problems decisions and
consequences
6. analyze, evaluate, and apply
relevant information from a
variety of sources

COURSE OUTCOMES:
 295

Upon successful completion of this course the students will have reliably demonstrated the
ability to:

DELIVERY METHODS / LEARNING ACTIVITIES:

LIST OF TEXTBOOKS AND OTHER TEACHING AIDS:

Required:

Recommended / Optional:

TESTING POLICY:

ASSIGNMENT POLICY:

EVALUATION SYSTEM:

Assessment Description: Outcome(s) EES Date / % of

Tool: assessed: assessed: Week: Final
Grade:

TOTAL: 100%

GRADING SYSTEM
The passing grade for this course is: ________

A 90- 4.0 B+ 77-79 3.3 C 67- 2.3 D 57- 1.3 Below F 0.

+ 100 + 69 + 59 50 0
A 86-89 4.0 B 73-76 3.0 C 63- 2.0 D 50- 1.0
66 56
A 80-85 3.7 B- 70-72 2.7 C 60- 1.7
- - 62
 296

Excerpt from the College Policy on Student Code of Conduct and Discipline:
The minimal consequence for submitting a plagiarized, purchased, contracted, or in any
manner inappropriately negotiated or falsified assignment, test, essay, project, or any
evaluated material will be a grade of zero on that material.
For more information on George Brown College policies please visit the website
(http://www.georgebrown.ca/policies).
TOPICAL OUTLINE:

Week Topic / Task Outcome(s) Content / Activities Resources

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 INTERSESSION WEEK
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Please note: this schedule may change as resources and circumstances require.

For information on withdrawing from this course without academic penalty, please refer to the
College Academic Calendar link (http://www.georgebrown.ca/Admin/Registr/PSCal.aspx).
 297

APPENDIX G ii
ART1021 Foundation Coulour-W2015

COURSE OUTLINE
SCHOOL OF DESIGN

COURSE NAME: FOUNDATION COLOUR

COURSE CODE: ART1021
CREDIT HOURS: 14 WEEKS X 3 HOURS = 42 HOURS
PREREQUISITES: NONE
COREQUISITES: NONE
PLAR ELIGIBLE: YES ( X ) NO ( )
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 2015
PROFESSORS: TBD
NOTE TO STUDENTS: Academic Departments at George Brown College will NOT retain historical copies of
Course Outlines. We urge you to retain this Course Outline for your future reference.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

ORIGINATOR:__Edda Dolcetti____________________________________________November
2011
SIGNATURE DATE

CHAIR:____Elise Hodson __ January 2015____________

SIGNATURE DATE

DATE OF REVISION:________May 16, 2014______________________________

EQUITY STATEMENT: George Brown College values the talents and contributions of its students, staff and
community partners and seeks to create a welcoming environment where equity, diversity and safety of all
groups are fundamental. Language or activities, which are inconsistent with this philosophy violate the College
policy on the Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment and will not be tolerated. The commitment and
cooperation of all students and staff are required to maintain this environment. Information and assistance
are available through your Chair, Student Affairs, the Student Association or the Human Rights Advisor.
George Brown College is dedicated to providing equal access to students with disabilities. If you require
academic accommodations visit the Disability Services Office or the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services
Office on your campus.
STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES: Students should obtain a copy of the Student Handbook and refer to it for additional
information regarding the grading system, withdrawals, exemptions, class assignments, missed tests and exams,
supplemental privileges, and academic dishonesty. Students are required to apply themselves diligently to the
course of study, and to prepare class and homework assignments as given. Past student performance shows a
strong relationship between regular attendance and success.

COURSE DESCRIPTION:
 298

Students are introduced to the basic fundamentals of colour. Concepts and theories
including visual creativity and process are explored. Students produce practical hands-
on projects using a variety of ideas and approaches that incorporate colour.

ESSENTIAL EMPLOYABILITY SKILLS:

As mandated by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities essential employability
skills (EES) will be addressed throughout all programs of study. Students will have the
opportunity to learn (L) specific skills, to practice (P) these skills, and/or be evaluated (E)
on the EES outcomes in a variety of courses. The EES include communication, numeracy,
critical thinking & problem solving, information management, interpersonal and personal
skills. The faculty for this course has indicated which of the EES are either Learned (L),
Practiced (P) or Evaluated (E) in this course:

Skill L P E Skill L P E
1. communicate clearly, concisely and X X 7. locate, select, organize and X X
correctly in the written, spoken and document information using
visual form that fulfills the purpose appropriate technology and
and meets the needs of the audience information sources
2. respond to written, spoken or visual X X 8. show respect for the diverse X
messages in a manner that ensures opinions, values, belief
effective communication systems, and contributions of
others
3. execute mathematical operations X X 9. interact with others in groups X X X
accurately or teams in ways that
contribute to effective working
relationships and the
achievement of goals
4. apply a systematic approach to solve X 10. manage the use of time and X X
problems other resources to complete
projects
5. use a variety of thinking skills to X X X 11. take responsibility for one’s X
anticipate and solve problems own actions, decisions and
consequences
6. analyze, evaluate, and apply relevant X X
information from a variety of sources

COURSE OUTCOMES:
Upon successful completion of this course the students will have reliably demonstrated
the ability to:
1. Apply visual communications and colour theories to the execution of projects.
2. Describe the effects of colour as it applies to visual images.
3. Prepare images that incorporate concepts of colour theories.
4. Execute a project from initial steps through to final completion according to
specifications.
5. Write rationales to justify use of colour in projects and present to class.
DELIVERY METHODS / LEARNING ACTIVITIES:
This course utilizes a variety of delivery methods: lectures, projects, quizzes,
audio/visual aides, in-class activities, handouts, visualization and individual/class
discussions.
 299

LIST OF TEXTBOOKS AND OTHER TEACHING AIDS:

Required Textbook:
Holtzschue, Linda. Understanding Color: An Introduction for Designers. 4th Edition,
John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
Recommended / Optional:
Itten, Johannes. The Elements of Colour. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co. Inc.
Itten, Johannes. The Art of colour. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co. Inc.
Eisenman, & Herbert. The Pantone Book.
Magazines: Marketing Magazine, Applied Arts, Communication Arts, Studio Magazine, Graphis.
Exhibitions: The Art Gallery of Ontario, The Design Exchange, The Ontario Science Centre.

Required Materials:
§ Only Windsor & Newton designers gouache paint: 2 tubes each of primary red,
primary blue, primary yellow & 1 tube each of white & black
§ 1 large [1"] & 1 small [1/4"] flat tipped watercolour brushes
§ Also #2, #6 & #12 pointed brushes, all sabeline
§ 12 clear mixing containers with lids
§ Variety of coloured pencils
§ Ruler
§ Compass set with protractor
§ Blue non-repro pencil & lead for compass
§ Painter’s masking tape
§ Magic transparent removable tape
§ Erasers
§ Hi-Art or cold-press illustration board, small drawing and painting pads
§ Reference material for researching ideas

TESTING POLICY:
Tests that are not completed on the date scheduled will receive a mark of zero unless
the student can provide a documented reason for absence.

ASSIGNMENT POLICY:
All projects and assignments must be submitted to pass this course.
Semester marks are based on the evaluation of projects and in-class assignments.
Obtaining missed assignments and/or projects is the student’s responsibility.

In class assignments must be completed within the assigned class time to receive
marks. No late submissions are accepted without prior consent of the Professor.

Late project submissions are subject to a late penalty of 10% (i.e. if you received a B,
it will become a C). Projects submitted later than 5 school days, will not be accepted
without a doctor’s note or without prior permission from the Professor.

EVALUATION SYSTEM:
 300

Assessment Tool: Description: Outcome(s) EES Date / % of

assessed: assessed: Week: Final
Grade:
Project 1 Students create a 12 hue 4,5 3,4 5,8,10,11 1–5 25%
12 Hue Colour colour wheel using gouache
Wheel/Illustration12 paint. 3 primary colours are
mixed to create secondary
and tertiary colours based on
mathematical proportions.
Students produce an
illustration using only these 12
hues.
Project 2 Students create a grayscale 1–5 1–11 5–10 25%
Colour Harmony and colour reference charts
Systems – using gouache paint.
variations of one
design Students research, plan and
produce a full colour design in
6 variations/schemes:
1. Monochromatic
2. Complementary
3. Triad
4. Tetrad
5. Analogous
6. Split Complementary
Project 3 Students create colour 1–5 1–11 10–14 25%
Illustration creating reference charts based on
depth illusion, Itten’s theory of seven
using blended contrasts.
colours and Students create a colour
palettes palette utilizing contrasts and
chromas.
Students create an illustration
using determined colour
palette. This illustration will
use Itten’s theory to create the
illusion of depth
In-class Students research and write 1–3 1–11 1–13 15%
Weekly exercises & summaries of theorists and
project reviews their contributions to
understanding colour.
Quiz 2,4 1,2 14 10%
TOTAL: 100%

GRADING SYSTEM
The passing grade for this course is: D
A+ 90-100 4.0 B+ 77-79 3.3 C+ 67-69 2.3 D+ 57-59 1.3 Below 50 F 0.0
A 86-89 4.0 B 73-76 3.0 C 63-66 2.0 D 50-56 1.0
A- 80-85 3.7 B- 70-72 2.7 C- 60-62 1.7

Excerpt from the College Policy on Academic Dishonesty:

The minimal consequence for submitting a plagiarized, purchased, contracted, or in any manner inappropriately
negotiated or falsified assignment, test, essay, project, or any evaluated material will be a grade of zero on that material.
To view George Brown College policies please go to www.georgebrown.ca/policies

TOPICAL OUTLINE:
 301

Week Topic / Task Outcome(s) Content / Activities Resources

1 Introduction 1 Course overview. •WIKI
Lecture: Colour background •Handouts
Practice: Mixing colours to create secondary and •Demonstration
tertiary colours based on mathematical proportions. •Lecture
Colour Wheel Tool.
2 Science of light 1, 3, 4 Lecture: History & science of light and colour. •WIKI
& colour In-class: Using the colour wheel to create primary, •Demonstration
secondary & tertiary colours, hues, tints and shades. •Powerpoint
Project 1 Brief: Design using gouache paint, based on for reference
colour wheel systems. Additive and Subtractive •Paint, Brushes
principles and cold press
board
3 Vocabulary of 1–4 Lecture: Meaning and application — hue, saturation, As above for
colour brightness. Understanding colour interaction, entire semester
emotional and physical effects of colour. Introduction
to colour harmonies.
In-class: Explore properties & effects of colour in
thumbnail variations, using hue, saturation, brightness
and harmonies.
Project 1 review: ideas, thumbnails, colour use.
4 Projects 1 and 2,4,5 Project 1 Due. Presentation with rationales and
2 critiques
Project 2 Brief: Based on colour harmony systems,
create six variations of one design.
5 Colour context 1–4 Lecture: Understanding context for how colours are
perceived: chromatic, achromatic, polychromatic,
monochromatic.
Tints, shades, figure/ground interaction.
Project 2 Review: Ideas, thumbnails, colour use.
In-class: Creating graduated scales as reference.
6 Colour Effects 1–4 Lecture: How colours are altered in combination,
juxtaposition, relative proximity: Itten’s theories of
colour contrasts.
In-class: Creating colour contrast reference charts.
7 Depth illusion 1–4 Lecture: Combining colours to create illusion of depth
using gradations, blended tones, shades, tints,
chromatic neutrals. Composing using figure/ground
principles.
Project 2 Review: Roughs, variations
In-class: Creating colour palettes.
8 INTERSESSION WEEK
9 Projects 2 & 3 2,4,5 Project 2 Due: Presentations with rationales &
critiques.
Project 3 Brief: One design — objective or non-
objective subject, to explore: combining colours to
create illusion of depth. Planning and developing
colour palettes. Understanding contexts for how
colours are perceived.
10 Important 1–4 Lecture: Summary of important theorists: philosophy
colour theorists and science. Models to understand colour:
organization of principles, Colour Ordering systems,
balancing values, intuitive approaches.
In-class: Research and write summaries of each
theorist & their respective contributions to
understanding colour.
Project 3 Review: Ideas, thumbnails, colour palettes
and use.
 302

11 Colour 1–4 Lecture: Symbolism of colour — colour as language

symbolism and meaning. Personal fashion styles, trends, cultural
associations, scientific, biological, psychological, visual
symbols, icons, flags, in brands, advertising, signage
systems, colour coding, information systems,
standardized Pantone Colour systems.
Project 3 Review: Roughs and projects in progress.
12 Digital Colour 1–4 Lecture: Digital colour — colour display modes,
screen and print applications, colour on web, emerging
media.
Project 3 Review: Project in progress.
In-class: Colour review with quiz.
13 Presentation 2,4,5 Project 3 Due. Presentation, rationale and critiques
and submission of final project.
14 Review and 2 Material review and discussion.
Test Final written test.
15 Project 2 Projects returned with final marks.
return/critiques Individual critiques and questions.
Please note: this schedule may change as resources and circumstances require.
For information on withdrawing from this course without academic penalty, please refer to the College Academic Calendar:
http://www.georgebrown.ca/Admin/Registr/PSCal.aspx
 303

APPENDIX G iii
COURSE OUTLINE
SCHOOL OF DESIGN
COURSE NAME: FOUNDATION DESIGN II: COLOUR THEORY AND PRACTICE
COURSE CODE: ART1021
CREDIT HOURS: 14 WEEKS X 3 HOURS = 42 HOURS
PREREQUISITES: NONE
COREQUISITES: NONE
PLAR ELIGIBLE: YES ( X ) NO ( )
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 2017
PROFESSOR: Jennifer Foote EMAIL: TBA
PROFESSOR: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi EMAIL: [email protected]

NOTE TO STUDENTS: Academic Departments at George Brown College will NOT retain historical copies of
Course Outlines. We urge you to retain this Course Outline for your future reference.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

ORIGINATOR:__Bahar Mousavi Hejazi_____________________________________January 2017

SIGNATURE DATE

CHAIR:____Elise Hodson __ January 2017

SIGNATURE DATE

DATE OF REVISION:________January 8, 2017_____________________________

EQUITY STATEMENT: George Brown College values the talents and contributions of its students, staff and
community partners and seeks to create a welcoming environment where equity, diversity and safety of all
groups are fundamental. Language or activities, which are inconsistent with this philosophy violate the College
policy on the Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment and will not be tolerated. The commitment and
cooperation of all students and staff are required to maintain this environment. Information and assistance
are available through your Chair, Student Affairs, the Student Association or the Human Rights Advisor.
George Brown College is dedicated to providing equal access to students with disabilities. If you require
academic accommodations visit the Disability Services Office or the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services
Office on your campus.
 304

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES: Students should obtain a copy of the Student Handbook and refer to it for
additional information regarding the grading system, withdrawals, exemptions, class assignments, missed
tests and exams, supplemental privileges, and academic dishonesty. Students are required to apply
themselves diligently to the course of study, and to prepare class and homework assignments as given. Past
student performance shows a strong relationship between regular attendance and success.

COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Students are introduced to the basic fundamentals of colour. Concepts and theories
including visual creativity and process are explored. Students produce practical hands-
on projects using a variety of analog and digital techniques that incorporate colour, and
coulour interactions. In groups, students research and present the use of colour
theories and practices in the works of prominent artists, designers and art and design
movements.

ESSENTIAL EMPLOYABILITY SKILLS:

As mandated by the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities essential employability
skills (EES) will be addressed throughout all programs of study. Students will have the
opportunity to learn (L) specific skills, to practice (P) these skills, and/or be evaluated (E)
on the EES outcomes in a variety of courses. The EES include communication, numeracy,
critical thinking & problem solving, information management, interpersonal and personal
skills. The faculty for this course has indicated which of the EES are either Learned (L),
Practiced (P) or Evaluated (E) in this course:

Skill L P E Skill L P E
1. communicate clearly, concisely and X X 7. locate, select, organize and X X
correctly in the written, spoken and document information using
visual form that fulfills the purpose appropriate technology and
and meets the needs of the audience information sources
2. respond to written, spoken or visual X 8. show respect for the diverse X
messages in a manner that ensures opinions, values, belief
effective communication systems, and contributions of
others
3. execute mathematical operations X 9. interact with others in groups X X
accurately or teams in ways that
contribute to effective working
relationships and the
achievement of goals
4. apply a systematic approach to solve X 10. manage the use of time and X
problems other resources to complete
projects
5. use a variety of thinking skills to X X 11. take responsibility for one’s X
anticipate and solve problems own actions, decisions and
consequences
6. analyze, evaluate, and apply relevant X X
information from a variety of sources

COURSE OUTCOMES:
Upon successful completion of this course the students will have reliably demonstrated
the ability to:
 305

1. Apply visual communications and colour theories to the execution of

projects.
2. Describe the effects of colour as it applies to visual images.
3. Prepare images that incorporate concepts of colour theories using analog
and digital media and techniques.
4. Execute a project from initial steps through to final completion according to
specifications.
5. Write rationales to justify use of colour in projects and present to class.
6. Present a research on the use of colour theories and practices in the works
of artists, art movements and designers.

DELIVERY METHODS / LEARNING ACTIVITIES:

This course utilizes a variety of delivery methods: lectures, handouts, projects,
audio/visual aides, in-class progress works, conceptualization, peer critique and
evaluation, group research and presentation, rationales, Blackboard and field trip to
GBC library.

LIST OF TEXTBOOKS AND OTHER TEACHING AIDS:

Recommended / Optional:
Holtzschue, Linda. Understanding Color: An Introduction for Designers. 4th Edition,
John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
Itten, Johannes. The Elements of Colour. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co. Inc.
Itten, Johannes. The Art of colour. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co. Inc.
Eisenman, & Herbert. The Pantone Book.

Required Materials:
§ Only Windsor & Newton designers gouache paint: 2 tubes each of primary red,
primary blue, primary yellow & 1 tube each of white & black
§ 1 large [1"] & 1 small [1/4"] flat tipped watercolour brushes
§ Also #2, #6 & #12 pointed brushes, all sabeline
§ 12 clear mixing containers with lids
§ Variety of coloured pencils
§ Ruler
§ Compass set with protractor
§ Blue non-repro pencil & lead for compass
§ Painter’s masking tape
§ Magic transparent removable tape
§ Erasers
§ Hi-Art or cold-press illustration board, small drawing and painting pads
§ Reference material for researching ideas

TESTING POLICY:
There are no tests in this course.
 306

ASSIGNMENT POLICY:
All projects must be submitted to pass this course.
Semester marks are based on the evaluation of projects and in-class assignments.
Obtaining missed assignments and/or projects is the student’s responsibility.

In class assignments must be completed within the assigned class time to receive
marks. No late submissions are accepted without prior consent of the Professor. Late
project submissions are subject to a late penalty of 10% (i.e. if you received a B, it will
become a C). No late submissions are accepted without prior consent of the Professor.

EVALUATION SYSTEM:
Assessment Tool: Description: Outcome(s) EES Date / % of
assessed: assessed: Week: Final
Grade:
Project 1 First, students create a 12 hue 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 1, 6, 9 5 25%
Creating Colour colour wheel using gouache
Wheel Tool & paint. 3 primary colours are
Illustration mixed to create secondary
and tertiary colours based on
visual perception. Students
produce an abstract
composition using only these
12 hues.
Project 2 Students create colour 1, 3, 4 1, 6, 9 9 25%
Colour Harmony reference grids using gouache
Systems: paint. Students alter an
Variations of One existing image and produce 6
Design variations of the same based
on Itten’s colour contrasts:
1. Hue
2. Cold-warm
3. Complementary
4. Simultaneous
5. Saturation
6. Extension
Project 3 Students create a grayscale 1, 3, 4 1, 6, 9 14 25%
Creating the and colour reference charts
Illusion of Depth based on Itten’s theory of
seven contrasts. Students
research, plan and produce a
full colour illustration using
determined colour palette and
mix-media techniques. This
illustration will use Itten’s
theory to create the illusion of
depth.
In-class Activities Students work under 1-5 1, 9 2–13 10%
Work-in-Progress supervision to develop
concepts and techniques for
each project.
Research Project In goups, students research 2, 6 1, 6, 9 14 & 15 15%
Colour and Style and present the use of colour
theories and practices in the
works of artists, movement of
arts and designers.
 307

TOTAL: 100%

GRADING SYSTEM
The passing grade for this course is: D
A+ 90-100 4.0 B+ 77-79 3.3 C+ 67-69 2.3 D+ 57-59 1.3 Below 50 F 0.0
A 86-89 4.0 B 73-76 3.0 C 63-66 2.0 D 50-56 1.0
A- 80-85 3.7 B- 70-72 2.7 C- 60-62 1.7

Excerpt from the College Policy on Academic Dishonesty:

The minimal consequence for submitting a plagiarized, purchased, contracted, or in any manner inappropriately
negotiated or falsified assignment, test, essay, project, or any evaluated material will be a grade of zero on that material.
To view George Brown College policies please go to www.georgebrown.ca/policies

TOPICAL OUTLINE
Week Topic / Task Outcome(s) Content / Activities Resources
1 Introduction 1 Course outline: An Overview •Handouts
In-class activity: Collage •Lecture
Project 1 Brief: Creating Colour Wheel and
Illustration

2 Colour background 1, 3, 4 In-class: Using the colour wheel to create primary, As above for
& Colour Wheel secondary & tertiary colours entire semester
Tool Project 1: Ideas & thumbnails

3 Vocabulary of 1–4 Lecture: Meaning and application — hue,

colour saturation, brightness. Understanding colour
interaction, emotional and physical effects of
colour. Introduction to colour harmonies.
Project 1 review: Ideas, thumbnails, colour use
4 Colour context 2,4,5 Lecture: Understanding context for how colours
are perceived: chromatic, achromatic,
polychromatic, monochromatic.
Tints, shades, figure/ground interaction.
Project 1: Rough/final concepts

5 Project 1 Critique 1–4 Project 1 Due

Project 2 Brief: Colour Harmony Systems

6 Colour Effects 1 1–4 Lecture: How colours are altered in combination,

Field Trip: GBC juxtaposition, relative proximity; Itten’s theories of
Library colour contrasts
Group Research Brief
7 Colour Effects 2 1–4 Lecture: Itten’s theories of colour contrasts
Project 2 Review: Roughs, variations

8 INTERSESSION WEEK
9 Projects 2 Critique 2,4,5 Project 2 Due: Presentations with rationales &
critiques.
10 Depth Illusion 1–4 Lecture: Combining colours to create illusion of
depth using gradations, blended tones, shades,
 308

tints, chromatic neutrals. Composing using

figure/ground principles.
Project 3 Brief
11 Depth Illusion 1–4 Project 3 Review: Ideas, thumbnails, colour
palettes and use

12 Colour Symbolism 1–4 Lecture: Symbolism of colour

Project 3 Review: Roughs and projects in
progress.
13 Project Reviews 2,4,5 Working class

14 Critique & 2 Project 3 Due. Presentation, rationale and

Research critiques.
Presentation Research Presentations

15 Research 2 Projects returned with final marks.

Presentation Individual critiques and questions.
Research Presentations
Please note: this schedule may change as resources and circumstances require.
For information on withdrawing from this course without academic penalty, please refer to the College Academic Calendar:
http://www.georgebrown.ca/Admin/Registr/PSCal.aspx
 309

APPENDIX G iv
Teaching Documents

Project 1
Colour Wheel & Composition
Reflection of Self

ART1021 Foundation Design II: Colour Theory & Practice

Professor: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi
Email: [email protected]

OBJECTIVE
Based on Itten’s theory of colour, the objective of this project is to first, create the colour wheel
tool or the artists’ spectrum as your colour reference. Then to use shape, texture, hues of the
colour wheel and the principles of design to create a composition that is the reflection of your
inner self.
DESCRIPTION
Phase 1- Develop a 12 hue colour wheel by mixing 3 primary colours to create secondary and
tertiary colours. The artist’ spectrum is a circle that illustrates hues in their natural (spectral)
order:
• Primary colours: red, yellow, blue
• Secondary colours: green, orange, purple
• Intermediate colours: yellow orange, red-orange, red- purple, blue-purple, blue-
purple, and yellow-green.
Phase 2- You have 2 options for this phase:
Option 1: Use geometric and/or organic shapes and the hues of the colour wheel to create an
abstract design that reflects you and/or your inner self.
Option 2: Produce a video game character using the hues of the colour wheel that represents you
or relates to your inner self.
PROCESS
1. Construct the colour wheel
2. Develop concepts for your composition
• Thumbnails (at least 5)
• Rough development from selected thumbnails (at least 2)
• Selection and development of most “successful” rough
• Comprehensive
• Finished (board arts)
• Write a rationale
3. Place process work and rationale in an envelope with your name in the lower, right corner
of the envelope.
MATERIALS
• Paint (gouache is preferred), colour papers, colour pencils, markers, fabrics, digital media and
any mixed-media
• Tracing papers, tape and glue stick
 310

• Illustration board or heavy weight Bristol (100 lb.) (Size is optional)

• Label for identification on the back of the final work
• Envelope (8.5” x 11”) to include final work, study process (thumbs, roughs, comp) and rationale.

TIMELINE & DELIVERABLES

Day 3- Colour Wheel (structure & primaries) & Concept Development (thumbnails)
Day 4- Colour Wheel (secondary & tertiaries) & Concept Development (roughs)
Day 5- Colour Wheel & Concept Development (comprehensive)
Day 6- Final submission of the process work and final works

This project is worth 25% (colour wheel is 10% and composition is 15%) of the final grade.

Project 1
Colour Wheel Tool & Illustration
Student _______________________________________

Colour Wheel Tool

Design /2

Primary colours /2

Secondary colours /2

Intermediate colours /2

Composition: Reflection of Self

Use of shapes (abstract or organic shapes/character) /3

Use of the hues of the colour wheel /3

Composition and meaning /3

Technique (paint handling, paint mixing, clean edges) /2

Presentation (appropriate backing, cover sheet, placement of work on backing, correct sizing,
consistency, precision) /2

Process Work /2

Rationale /2

Total /25
 311

Project 2
Colour Harmony Systems
Variations of One Design

OBJECTIVE
The objective of this assignment is to produce 6 variations of an artwork or a design using Itten’s
colour contrasts.

DESCRIPTION
The goal of this assignment is to experience Itten’s theory of colour contrasts. Choose a design
and apply the following Itten’s colour contrasts’ variations. The design will remain the same
when the contrast of colours changes from one experience to the other.

• Contrast of hue
• Cold-warm contrast
• Complementary contrast
• Simultaneous contrast
• Contrast of saturation
• Contrast of extension

PROCESS
4. Choose an image
5. Develop colour contrasts for each of the six versions in grid format (per instructions)
6. Finalize the contrast versions using appropriate media and technique
7. Place process work and rubric in an envelope with your name in the lower, right corner of
the envelope.

MATERIALS
• Paint (gouache is preferred), colour papers, colour pencils, markers, fabrics, digital media and
any mixed-media
• Tracing papers, tape and glue stick
• Illustration board or heavy weight Bristol (100 lb.) (Size is optional)
• Label for identification on the back of the final work
• Envelope (8.5” x 11”) to include study process and rubric.

TIMELINE & DELIVERABLES

Day 7- Image selection
Day 8- Contrast Exercises (Grids)
Day 9- Contrast Variations (6 versions applied on the selected design)
Day 10- Final submission of the process work and final works

This project is worth 25% of the final grade.

 312

Project 2
Colour Harmony Systems
Variations of One Design

Student _______________________________________

Contrast of Hue /3

Cold-Warm Contrast /3

Complementary Contrast /3

Simultaneous Contrast /3

Contrast of Saturation /3

Contrast of Extension /3

Workmanship (Handling of the Medium) /2

Presentation (Cleanliness and Professionalism)

/2

Process Work (Experimentation with Grids) /3

Total /25
 313

Project 3
Colour & Illusion of Depth
Light-Dark Contrast Chart & Composition

OBJECTIVE
The objective of this assignment is to use Itten’s colour contrasts (with an emphasis on light-dark
contrast) and the principles of design to create the illusion of depth in a composition.

DESCRIPTION
First, create the light-dark contrast chart. This palette should represent a regular series of grays
and at least 3 colours that you would like to use in order to create the illusion of depth.

• The series of grays from white to black should be created in 12 steps (including black and
white).
• The series of a minimum of 3 pure colours (hues of the colour wheel) that correspond
with the series of grays should be created in the same steps.
• It means that the pure yellow answers to the 4th step, orange is at the 6th step, red at the
8th, blue at the 9th, and purple at the 10th step in the scale of grays. The chart shows
saturated yellow to be the lightest of the pure colours, and purple the darkest.

Then, create the illusion of depth and three-dimensional space through either a realistic or an
abstract design by using the tints and shades of the colours that you have developed in your light-
dark contrast chart. The use of black, white and grays is optional. Other colour contrasts
experimented in Project 2 can be explored as well, such as complementary or cold-war colours.

PROCESS
8. Develop the gray scale and at least 3 colour charts per above instructions
9. Develop concepts for your composition using the tints and shades of the chosen colours
• Concepts (minimum of 3)
• Rough development from selected concept (minimum of 2)
• Selection and development of most successful rough
• Comprehensive
• Finished (board arts)
10. Write a rationale
11. Place process work and rationale in an envelope with your name in the lower, right corner
of the envelope.

MATERIALS
• Paint (gouache is preferred), acrylic, watercolour, colour papers, colour pencils, markers, fabrics,
digital media or
mixed-media
• Tracing papers, tape and glue stick
• Illustration board or heavy weight Bristol (100 lb.) (Size is optional)
• Label for identification on the back of the final work
• Envelope (8.5” x 11”) to include study process, rationale and rubric.
 314

TIMELINE & DELIVERABLES

Week 10- Concept Development (sketching) for composition
Week 11- Value Scales & Concept Development (roughs)
Week 12- Final submission of the process work, final work and rationale

This project is worth 25% of the final grade.

Colour & Illusion of Depth

Light-Dark Contrast Chart & Composition

Student _______________________________________

Light-Dark Contrast Chart

Minim. 3 pure colours (12 steps) /6
Grey Scale (12 steps) /2
______________________________________________________________________________
Composition: Illusion of Depth
Design & Colour (Elements and Principles of Design) /3
Light-Dark Palette (Use of Tints & Shades) /3
3 Dimensionality & Space (Use of Colour Contrasts) /3

Process Work (Concepts, Roughs and Experimentation) /3

Presentation (Technique, Cleanliness & Professionalism) /3
Rationale (Organization of the Written Material in accordance with the Project) /2

Total /25
 315

Project 4
Practice of Colour in Art & Design

OBJECTIVE
The objective of this project is to explore the implementation of colour theories and practices in
different disciplines of art and design such as environmental arts (architecture, landscape design,
interior design, product design), studio arts (painting, sculpture, ceramics, glass, photography,
fiber arts), fashion (clothing, jewelry) and commercial arts (graphic design) through the works of
their artists, designers and/or movements of art.

DESCRIPTION
In groups (2-3), research and present the contribution of artists/designers and schools of art in the
understanding and use of colour. The following aspects of colour should be investigated in this
project:

• Historical background
• Psychological and cultural influences
• Physical characteristics (medium, material and technique)
• Colour aesthetics (form, emotion, symbol)

PROCESS
1. Choose a group
2. Brainstorm with your group members
3. Choose a discipline of art/design
4. Research the art movement and its prominent artists and designers
5. Present your research and analysis in a digital format

REQUIREMENTS
Each member of the group should present 5 slides of the final group presentation.
A minimum of 5 works should be presented.
Use APA or MLA formats for your references/bibliography.

TIMELINE & DELIVERABLES

Day 4- Grouping & Brainstorming
Day 5- Library Workshop & Individual Research
Day 7- One-on-one consultation with the Librarian
Day 8- Library Workshop Activity Due & Group Work
Day 9- Group discussion on Research analysis
Day 12- Group work on final Presentation
Day 13 & 14- Final Presentations

The Library Workshop Activity (Individual) is 5%.

The Final Presentation (Group) is 15% of the final grade.
 316

Project 4
Practice of Colour in Art & Design
(Group)

Student _______________________________________

Content (Practice of Colour in Art & Design) /5

Research (Quality of Data, Analysis & References) /5

Presentation (Organization of the Material, Visual Aids, Body Language & Pitch) /5

Total /15
 317

Library Activity Worksheet (Individual)

Draft due Monday, July 24
Final Due Thursday, July 27
Total: 5%

This library session and worksheet will help you develop research skills and work towards
completing the research required for your Practice of Colour in Art & Design Project due in Day
13 & 14. Using question 4, try to find as many references (books/article) as possible, using the
library resources. During this session, make sure to drawn on the Librarian’s expertise to help
you in your research.

1. What is your topic (e.g. Advertising). What aspect of your topic are you working on (e.g.
Historical Background, Aesthetics, etc)?
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________

2. Ask 3 research questions. (Remember, this is different than your topic, a research question
should be more specific. (e.g. To what degree did colour impact the effectiveness of propaganda
during World War II?)

Question 1:
___________________________________________________________________________

Question 2:
___________________________________________________________________________

Question 3:
___________________________________________________________________________

3. Develop a series of keywords (based on one of your research questions) to help you search the
library database for resources related to your research question. Mention the related question
before the keywords.
 318

______________________________________________________________________________
_______________

4. List Three (3) databases specifically related to your subject area (Design) and briefly explain
why you used One (1) of them.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________

5. Find Three (3) articles AND One (1) book related to your research question that you think will
be relevant for your project. Record the APA citation and briefly explain why you think the
article/book will be useful to your project. (The point of this exercise is to get you researching
now - you might even be able to complete the necessary research for your assignment in this
class.)
Article 1:
Citation:
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________
Annotation:
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________
Article 2:
Citation:
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________
Annotation:
______________________________________________________________________________
________________________
Article 3:
 319

Citation:
______________________________________________________________________________
________________________
Annotation:
______________________________________________________________________________
________________________
Book:
Citation:
______________________________________________________________________________
________________________
Annotation:
 320

APPENDIX G v
Guideline Draft Rationale

ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form & Space

Professor: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi
Email: [email protected]

Use the vocabulary of art and design from your Art Fundamentals textbook, your notes and the
lectures delivered in the classroom to write a rationale. Your final submission should be one-
page, typed-out with no headings.

Introduction: Write one paragraph to introduce the project and explain why your selected image
is a good choice for this project.

Discussion: Write 1 or 2 paragraphs to explain the different steps of your design process work,
your use of the elements of design (point/line/shape) to study the composition of the image, the
tools and medium used in your project and the way you achieved your final presentation.

Conclusion: Write one paragraph about your overall experience in this project. What you
learned, how you would approach this project if you were to redo it, and your overall satisfaction
of the final work.
 321

Appendix G vi
Sample Agenda –
Day 2 – ART1027 Summer 2017

ART1021 FOUNDATION DESIGN II

Professor: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi
Email: [email protected]

Agenda
My PhD Research & Consent Letters for Volunteer Student Participants
Course Outline: An Overview
Lecture- Practice of Colour in Art and Design
Project 1 Brief: Creating Colour Wheel & Illustration
Break
Studio- Activity 1: In groups, develop a collage to show the relationship between colour and
the elements of design (line, shape, value, colour, texture, space) using theprinciples of design
such as balance, proportion, rhythm, movement and dominance. Present your group work to the
class.
 322

APPENDIX G vii
‘About Me’
Questionnaire

ART1020 FOUNDATION DESIGN I

Professor: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi
Email: [email protected]

Your Name:
Introduce yourself to your peers by filling up this questionnaire. Submit the completed form on
Blackboard with YourName-AboutMe-W2021 under Studio Activities folder/ ‘About Me’
Questionnaire.
1. What is your initial goal in undertaking the Art & Design Foundation program?
❏ Explore my opportunities in the field of Art and Design
❏ Develop my portfolio
❏ Get a job
❏ Further education
❏ Other (explain)____________________________

2. What are your plans after the completion of this Program?

❏ Apply to ___________________program at the GBC School of Design
❏ Apply to ___________________program at____________________University/College
❏ Start working at _____________/ Look for work as ______________________________
❏ I’m not sure yet
❏ Other (explain)____________________________

3. In a short paragraph, write about yourself, your educational background, your passion, your
dreams and your future aspirations. Where do you see yourself in 5 years?
 323

APPENDIX G viii
Critique
Project 1. Study of Form
Point/Line/Shape

ART1020 Foundation Design I: Form & Space

Professor: Bahar Mousavi Hejazi
Email: [email protected]

Your Name:

1. Study your own work carefully and talk about the elements of your assignment completion
that you feel are most successful. Explain why you feel the way that you do.

2. Study the work of one of your classmates and explain how their work responds to the
requirements of the project.

3. What did you learn from doing this assignment that will improve your understanding of form
and the use of line and shape in composition?
 324

APPENDIX G ix
Student Feedback Questionnaire

ART 1021 - FOUNDATION COLOUR - 83447 - Bahar Mousavihejazi -

Spring/Summer 2017
Student Feedback Questionnaire

Report Comments

Course Type: In-Class

Term: Spring/Summer 2017

Creation Date Tue, Nov 14, 2017

Raters Students
Responded 7
Invited 21
Response Ratio 33%

Distribution of Responses

Course Management

The teacher:

1. Provides information on course outcomes and evaluation methods at the beginning of the course

2. Conducts the course in a well-organized way

 325

3. Explains concepts clearly

4. Treats students with courtesy

Course Management (continued)

The teacher:
5. Provides helpful comments and feedback

6. Is available at the times indicated (i.e. as stated on the course outline, or online, or in-class, etc.)
 326

7. Helps me to think independently about the topics in my course

8. Encourages student participation (i.e. by posing questions, through class discussions and/or group
work, etc.)

Course Content

1. I understand how the learning activities (e.g. lectures, class discussions, assignments, etc.) are related to
the goals of the course

2. Texts and other materials (e.g. videos, handouts, readings, online learning tools, etc.) are informative
and help me learn the course material

3. Evaluation methods (i.e. assignments, activities, tests, etc.) help me learn the course material

4. This course motivated me to learn more about the subject

 327

Overall

The overall effectiveness of the teacher of this course is:

As a learning experience, this course is:

Comparative Scores

College and School averages are based on course type.

The questions that follow use a scale of 1 to 4:

4=Strongly Agree, 3=Agree, 2=Disagree, 1=Strongly Disagree

Course Management
1. Provides information on course
outcomes and evaluation methods
at the beginning of the course
 328

2. Conducts the course in a well-

organized way

3. Explains concepts clearly

4. Treats students with courtesy

5. Provides helpful comments and

feedback

6. Is available at the times indicated

(i.e. as stated on the course outline,
or online, or in-class, etc.)

7. Helps me to think independently

about the topics in my course

8. Encourages student participation

(i.e. by posing questions, through
class discussions and/or group
work, etc.)
 329

Course Content
1. I understand how the learning
activities (e.g. lectures, class
discussions, assignments, etc.) are
related to the goals of the course

2. Texts and other materials (e.g.

videos, handouts, readings, online
learning tools, etc.) are informative
and help me learn the course
material

3. Evaluation methods (i.e.

assignments, activities, tests, etc.)
help me learn the course material

4. This course motivated me to

learn more about the subject

Overall

The questions that follow use a scale of 1 to 5:

5=Excellent, 4=Good, 3=Satisfactory, 2=Unsatisfactory, 1=Poor

The overall effectiveness of the teacher of this course is:

As a learning experience, this course is:

 330

Statistical Analysis
Course Management
Mean StDev Responses
Provides information on course outcomes and evaluation methods at the beginning of the
3.9 0.4 7
course
Conducts the course in a well-organized way 3.7 0.5 7
Explains concepts clearly 3.9 0.4 7
Treats students with courtesy 3.9 0.4 7
Provides helpful comments and feedback 3.7 0.5 7
Is available at the times indicated (i.e. as stated on the course outline, or online, or in-
3.9 0.4 7
class, etc.)
Helps me to think independently about the topics in my course 3.7 0.5 7
Encourages student participation (i.e. by posing questions, through class discussions
3.9 0.4 7
and/or group work, etc.)

Course Content
Mean StDev Responses
I understand how the learning activities (e.g. lectures, class discussions, assignments,
3.7 0.5 7
etc.) are related to the goals of the course
Texts and other materials (e.g. videos, handouts, readings, online learning tools, etc.) are
3.7 0.5 7
informative and help me learn the course material
Evaluation methods (i.e. assignments, activities, tests, etc.) help me learn the course
3.7 0.5 7
material
This course motivated me to learn more about the subject 3.7 0.5 7

Overall

Mean StDev Responses

The overall effectiveness of the teacher of this course is: 4.7 0.5 7

Mean StDev Responses

As a learning experience, this course is: 4.7 0.5 7

Student Information
 331

High Medium Low Responses

Before the course began, my level of enthusiasm to take this course was: 71 % 29 % 0% 7

Always Usually Seldom Never Responses

I attend classes in this course: 57 % 43 % 0% 0% 7

A B C D F Responses
The grade I expect to receive for this course is: 43 % 43 % 14 % 0 % 0 % 7

Teacher: Bahar Mousavihejazi has selected to have comments for this course
If you have any comments for Bahar Mousavihejazi about this course (CRN 83447) please
add them here.

Comments
You help everyone to learn more about art. Thank you for your help on everything. :)
Bahar was one of the greatest teachers I've ever had. Her enthusiasm and encouragement kept me intrigued and
motivated throughout the semester. Even when things got rough she helped layout the steps required to move forward
successfully in this course. Love her passion for art!! Highly recommend.

-Mar
This course was a joy to take, and Bahar is an excellent instructor.
 332

APPENDIX G x
Figures for Chapter Four and Chapter Five

Figure 1

Instructions on Whiteboard & Final Works on Display- Elements and Principles of Design

Figure 2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9

Students Engaged in Group Work- Elements and Principles of Design

 333

Figure 10-11-12-13-14-15

Final Group Works (From Top Left: Line, Shape, Value, Colour, Texture and Space)
 334

Figure 16

Classroom Prepared for Lecture

Figure 17-18-19-20-21-22

Notes, Instructions and Student Samples on Whiteboard

 335

Figure 23-24

Students Working Alone

 336

Figure 25-26

Students Working Together

Figure 27-28

Work-in-Progress
 337

Figure 29-30-31

Displaying the Work-in-Progress

Figure 32

Computer Screens Display the Course Content

Figure 33

Students Working Outside of the Classroom

 338

Figure 34-35-36

Student Working on their Final Artwork (Project 2)

 339

Figure 37

Final Project on Display (Project 1)

Figure 38-39

Final Presentation (Project 3)

 340

Figure 40-41

Final Presentation- Project 4: Practice of Colour in Art & Design(Group)

Figure 42

Attending the Library Session for Project 4: Practice of Colour in Art & Design in GBC’s St.

James Campus (200 – King St.)

 341

Figure 43-44

Faculty Reflection Group Meeting- School of Design- August 2019

Figure 45

Year End Show- Art and Design Foundation Exhibition- Winter 2018
 342

APPENDIX H
End of the Year Questionnaire

G108 Art & Design Foundation Survey

Curriculum Planning
Summer 2017

Please let us know about your experience in the Art & Design Foundation Program for the
purpose of curriculum planning and improvement.

1. What were your favourite courses/projects? Why?

2. Which courses/projects did you struggle with? Why?

3. To what degree has the program met your expectations?

o Very Satisfied
o Satisfied
o Neutral
o Dissatisfied
o Very Dissatisfied
o N/A

4. What would you like to see more of in this program?

Other Thoughts: